DOMNICA SERBAN

7+(6<17$;2)(1*/,6+35(',&$7,216




































'HVFULHUHD&,3D%LEOLRWHFLL1D LRQDOHD5RPkQLHL
(5%$1'201,&$
7KH6\QWD[RI(QJOLVK3UHGLFDWLRQV/ Domnica Serban
Bucuresti: Editura Funda iei 5RPkQLDGH0kLQH, 2006
208p.; 20,5 cm.
Bibliogr.
ISBN 973-725-507-0

811.111'36




Coperta: Reproducere dup tabloul 7DEO GHDK de Vieira da Silva





















Editura Funda iei 5RPkQLDGH0kLQH, 2006
81,9(56,7$7($63,58+$5(7
FACULTATEA DE LIMBI SI LITERATURI STR INE

DOMNICA SERBAN

EDITURA FUNDA IEI 5201,$'(0,1(
Bucuresti, 2006












5



&217(176






Preface ............................ 11
I.7+(*(1(5$/3,&785(
1. The Targeted Issue ..................... 15
1.1. Universal Grammar (UG) as Theoretical Frame ....... 18
1.2. Cross-linguistic Principles as Invariants ........... 19
1.3. Parameters as Variables ................ 20
2. Grammar as a Model oI Competence ............ 22
2.1. The Property oI Grammaticality ............ 23
3. The Organization oI Grammar ............... 25
3.1. The Derivation oI Syntactic Structures .......... 28
3.2. The Constituent/Phrase Structure oI the Sentence/Clause .. 30
3.3. Constituent IdentiIication ................ 31
3.4. Syntactic Categories: Phrases as Sentence Constituents ..... 33
3.4.1. The Structure and Distribution oI Noun Phrases (NPs) .. 34
3.4.2. The Structure and Distribution oI Verb Phrases (VPs) ... 36
3.4.3. The Structure and Distribution oI Adjectival Phrases
and Adverbial Phrases ..............

38
3.4.4. The Structure and Distribution oI Prepositional Phrases 40
3.5. Functional Categories as Phrases Heads ........... 41
3.6. The Sentence as an InIlection Phrase (with InIlection
as Functional Head) ...................

42
3.7. The Role oI the InIlection Head oI the Sentence ....... 44
3.8. Clausal Constituents as Complementizer Phrases (CPs) ..... 46
3.9. Syntactic Categories oI a Greater Complexity: The Compound
and Complex Sentence Types ...............

47
3.9.1. Compound Sentences ............... 47
3.9.2. Complex Sentences ................ 48
3.9.3. A Special Type oI CP the Small Clause ........ 48
3.9.4. Compound Complex Sentences ........... 49
6
4. The X-bar Convention Ior Phrase Structure Representation ..... 50
4.1. Head-Complement Dependencies ............ 53
4.2. Dominance Relations within Phrases: c-command
and m-command ..................

53
4.3. The Relation oI Government and the Mechanism
oI Case Assignment ..................

55
4.4. More on Case Assignment: The Case Filter ........ 57
4.5. Nominative Case Assignment to the S-Structure Subject ... 58
4.6. Types oI Case Assignment .............. 58
5. The Link between the Lexicon and the Syntax:
The Projection Principle ..................

59
5.1. More on Thematic (Theta-) Roles ............ 60
5.2. Thematic Roles Universally Assigned by Verbs ........ 62
5.3. The Theta criterion .................. 63
5.4. Types oI Arguments: Inherent versus Non-inherent,
External versus Internal Arguments ............

64
5.5. Subtypes oI Internal Arguments ............ 66
5.6. Two Levels oI Occurrence oI Prepositional Phrases .... 67
6. Back to the Lexicon. Summing up Types oI InIormation
in the Lexical Entry oI Verbs ................

68
6.1.Selectional Features: C-selection and S-selection ..... 71
6.2. Cross-categorial ClassiIications ............ 73
6.3. Other Semantic Cross-classiIications .......... 77
6.5. Subcategories with a Two-Iold Regime and the Floating
Phenomenon .....................

78
II.6,03/(,175$16,7,9(35(',&$7,216
1. Syntactically Simple versus Syntactically Complex Intransitives 80
2. Split Intransitivity: Unergatives and Unaccusatives ........ 81
2.1. The Representation oI Unergatives and Unaccusatives ..... 82
2.2 Semantic SubclassiIication oI Unergatives ........ 83
2.3. Syntactic Properties oI Unergatives ........... 84
2.4. Further Semantic and Syntactic Properties oI Unergatives . 85
2.5 Semantic ClassiIication oI Unaccusatives ........ 86
2.6. Syntactic Subcategorization oI Unaccusatives ...... 86
3. Simple Intransitives with Adjuncts ............ 89
III. &20326,7(35(',&$7,216
1. Explanation oI the Cover Term Composite Predication` ... 91
1.1. The S-Structure oI Copulative Predicates ......... 92
1.2. Copular BE versus Other Types oI BE .......... 92
7
1.3. Formal/Structural Properties oI all BEs ......... 94
1.4. Particular Properties oI Copular and Existential BE Types ... 94
2. Constituents Distributed as Predicatives in S-Structure .... 95
2.1. Theta-role Assignment in Copulative Structures ....... 96
2.2. The Hypothetical D-Structure oI Copulative Predicates .. 97
2.3. Syntactic Features oI Copula-like Verbs ........ 100
2.4. Semantic SubclassiIication oI Copula-like Verbs ...... 102
2.4.1. Usage oI Copula-like Verbs ............ 102
2.4.2. Aspectual Copula-like Verbs .......... 103
2.4.3. Inchoative Copula-like Verbs ............ 103
2.4.4. Positional Copula-like Verbs .......... 104
2.4.5. Sense Perception Copula-like Verbs ........ 106
2.4.6. Final Remarks ................. 106
3. More about the Logico-semantic Subtypes: Attributive versus
Equative Predicates ...................

107
3.1. The Attributive Subtype: Class-membership and Class-inclusion 107
3.2. The Equative or IdentiIying Subtype .......... 109
4. Typology oI Adjectival Predicatives ............ 110
4.1. Lexically Derived Adjectives in Predicative Position ... 111
4.1.1. A Case oI Ambiguity: Copulative Predicate
or Statal/Agentless Passive? ...........

113
4.1.2. Prepositional Deverbal Adjectives ........ 114
5. Subcategorization oI Adjectives into Predicative and ModiIying 115
5.1. Exclusively Predicative Adjectives .......... 115
5.2. Exclusively ModiIying Adjectives ........... 117
5.3. Syntactically Regular Adjectives with Distinct Meanings . 118
5.4. The Subcategory oI Pseudo-Adjectives ......... 118
5.5. The Inherent versus the Non-Inherent Use ....... 119
6. Further Description oI Nominal Predicatives .......... 120
6.1. The Equative Nominal Type .............. 122
6.2. Number Agreement between the Subject and the Predicative 123
7. Prepositional Phrases as Predicatives ........... 124
7.1. Predicatives with Undeletable Preposition ........ 124
7.2. Predicatives with Deletable Preposition ......... 125
8. Reciprocal Copulative Predicates ............. 126
8.1.Subcategorization oI Reciprocal Predicative Adjectives .. 127
8.2. More Complex Predicative Structures: the Predicative
Adjunct to the Subject ...............

128
9. Composite Predicates with Prop` Verbs and Non-Contrastive
Objects` .......................

129
8
IV. &203/(;,175$16,7,9(35(',&$7,216
1. Lexically Complex versus Syntactically Complex ....... 132
1.1. Lexically Complex Intransitives. The Problem oI the Particle 132
1.2. Typology oI Intransitive Complex Verbs according to the
Semantic Criterion ..................
135
1.2.1. Complex Verbs with Locative or Directional Particles 135
1.2.2. Aspectual Complex Verbs ........... 136
1.3. Syntactic Features oI Intransitives with Particle...... 137
1.4. The Subcategory oI Inherent ReIlexives ........ 139
2. Intransitives with Prepositional Object ........... 140
2.1. Passivization oI Prepositional Intransitives.
Preposition Stranding ................

141
2. 2. Nominalization, Relative Clause Formation and Emphasis 143
2.3. Intransitives with Particle and Preposition ........ 143
3. Other Syntactically Complex Intransitives ........... 145
3.1. Intransitives with a Prepositional Indirect Object ...... 145
3.1.1. The Experiencer Subtype ............ 145
3.1.2. The Relational Subtype ............. 146
3.1.3. The Goal Subtype. Passivization Possibilities ..... 147
3.2. Intransitives with Two Prepositional Objects ...... 147
3.3. A Hybrid Type: Intransitives with Obligatory Adverbial
ModiIiers ....................

149
3.3.1. Intransitives with Manner Adverbials ........ 150
3.3.2. Intransitives with QuantiIying Adverbials ..... 150
3.4. Predications Based on Reciprocal Intransitives ..... 151
3.5. Prepositional Intransitives with Complement Clauses ..... 152
4. Recategorization oI Transitives as Intransitives ......... 153
V. 6,03/(75$16,7,9(35(',&$7,216
1. Simple Transitives. Government and Accusative Case Assignment 155
1.1. Subcategorization oI Monotransitives according to the
Theta-Role oI the Direct Object ............

156
1.2. Monotransitives with EIIected/Resultative Object .... 159
1.2.1. Transitives with a Many-Iold Regime ........ 160
1.3. Monotransitives with Instrumental` Patient ........ 164
1.4. Monotransitives with Locative Direct Object ...... 164
1.5. Monotransitives with Abstract Theme ........... 165
1.6. Monotransitives with Experiencer Subjects ......... 166
1.7. Monotransitives with Experiencer Objects ....... 167
2. Relational Transitives in Asymmetric or Symmetric Predications 167
2.1. Transitive Verbs oI Possession ............. 169
2.2. Bound Direct Objects: Reciprocal and ReIlexive ...... 170
9
3. Typology oI Causative Verbs .............. 171
3.1. Prototypical Causatives ................ 173
3.2. Lexical Causatives .................. 174
3.3. Morphologically Derived Causatives .......... 176
3.3.1. Causatives Derived by Conversion ......... 176
3.3.2. Causatives Derived by AIIixation ......... 176
3.4. Further Subcategorization oI Causatives ........ 178
3.5. The Causative - Inchoative Relationship .......... 179
4. The Syntax and Semantics oI Ergative Verbs ........ 180
VI. &203/(;75$16,7,9(35(',&$7,216
1. Transitives with Particle vs. Intransitives with Particle .... 184
1.1. Complex Verbs with Two Alternations ......... 186
1.2. Complex Transitives with no Alternation ......... 188
1.3. Transitives with Particle and Preposition .......... 188
2. Transitives with Prepositional Object ............. 189
2.1. Transitives with Instrumental Prepositional Object as Adjunct 190
2.2. Transitive Alternations with Prepositional Phrase as Adjunct 190
2.3. Transitives with Adverbial oI Place ............ 191
2.4. Monotransitive verbs with Predicative Adjunct ...... 191
2.5. Causatives with an Obligatory AvP oI Place ....... 192
3. BrieI Description oI Ditransitives. The Double Object Construction 193
3.1. The Argument Structure oI Dative Verbs ......... 193
3.2. The Syntax oI Datives: the Two Alternations ......... 193
3.3. Ditransitives with Two Non-prepositional Objects .... 194
3.4. Ditransitives with Obligatory Prepositional Indirect Object .... 194
3.5. Subcategorization oI Dative Transitives ........ 195
3.6. Problems with the Approach to Datives ......... 196
4. Recategorization oI Intransitives as Transitives ....... 196
4.1. Intransitive Verbs Recategorized as Transitive by Resultative
Object Formation ..................
197
4.2 Recategorization by Cognate Object Formation ...... 198
4.3.Recategorization by Annihilation oI the Preposition ..... 200
4.4. Dummy IT Direct Objects .............. 200
4.5. Causative Transitives Derived Irom Intransitives ...... 201
Bibliography ....................... 203
Corpus .......................... 207


10





































11


35()$&(

The present hanabook focuses on one of the ma/or issues in English

syntax, namely the linguistic status of predication at the level of simple
sentences. Irrespective of the theoretical or practical orientation of various
approaches to grammar, the centrality of the preaicating verb in the
structural configuration of the sentence ana its meaning interpretation is
unanimously agreea upon. This explains our option for the respective topic,
which actually forms the core of any course on English syntax.
The analysis ana aescription of various types oI predicates
presupposes the stuaents previous grounaing in modern linguistic theory. In
the section aevotea to The General Picture we shall present some of the
essential linguistic concepts whose assimilation is inaispensable for the
unaerstanaing of predication in English. As a matter of fact, the book mainly
aaaresses the secona year stuaents who reaa English as ma/or or minor
specialty ana, consequently, have alreaay stuaiea general linguistics, with
particular emphasis on what is meant by a model-based grammar ana how
such a grammar is organi:ea internally.
During the first year of stuay two important components of grammar
have alreaay been coverea. phonetics and phonology auring the first term
ana morphology auring the secona. Thus our unaergraauates have become
familiar with notions such as level oI linguistic analysis and description,
linguistic unit ana structure, grammatical category a.s.o., let alone the
concepts of linguistic Ieature of a lexical item or whole class/category of
items. Our stuaents shoula also be aware of the aistinction between a basic
or inherent feature or regime ana a aerivea one, resulting from a shift from a
basic to a aerivea, often contextual, occurrence. This change is labellea as
the stuaent will know as recategorization (e.g. the shift from an uncountable
noun class such as that of mass nouns like coIIee, wine, water etc. to the
class of countables, i.e. possibly markea by the plural as well, or the
recategori:ation from state verbs take the example of sense perception
verbs incluaing taste, sound, smell, look, hear to that of activity verbs usea
to aenote a aeliberate ana controllea activity. It so happens that in the latter
12
case the verb is inherently an intransitive one, i.e. an ob/ectless verb, which,
by recategori:ing as an activity verb, also shifts to the subcategory of
transitive verbs. This process is of a syntactic nature. The present textbook
will concentrate on such problems that have to ao with the basic syntactic
behavior of preaicating verbs, which is aeterminea by their inherent
subcategory features ana appurtenance ana, whenever is the case, with their
recategori:ation possibilities.
Our stuaents are, hopefully, also aware of the progress maae by
moaern linguistic science, having stuaiea the main structuralist ana
generative trenas in the 20th century. Hence, they will be able to grasp the
more abstract notions ana to follow the argumentation, if any. All the more
so, as ob/ective aescription ana coverage of a great amount of language
aata, supplementea by explanation of the complex processes at work in the
various compartments of grammar, might turn out to be of a great help in the
stuaents actual use of syntactic structures.
The materials incluaea in the present book are mainly arawn from
my first course in English Syntax (TUB, 1982), from my aissertation on
Syntactic Functions in Universal Grammar (TUB, 1986), as well as from the
English Syntax Workbook (Eaitura Funaa iei Romania ae Maine, 2004),
which I wrote in cooperation with my younger colleagues Raluca Ha gan
ana Denisa Dr gu,in. These materials have been sub/ect to revision ana
upaating, the stress being laia on accessibility to the stuaent.
My 40 years of experience, mainly incluaing a steaay interaction
with my stuaents ana team workers, be they seniors or /uniors, represent,
however, the main source of the present book. By acknowleaging my
inaebtness to their cooperation in syntactic aebates relatea to the ma/or
topics of this book, I actually want to express my heartfelt thanks to their
suggestions, critical remarks ana enthusiasm for syntax in general.


THE AUTHOR









13



/,672)$%%5(9,$7,216




A/Adj: Adjective NP: Noun Phrase
Acc: Accusative P: Preposition
Adv: Adverb PP: Preposition Phrase
AvP: Adverb Phrase PF: Phonological Form
Agr: Agreement Pl: Plural
AP: Adjective Phrase P&P: Principles and Parameters
Asp: Aspect Poss: Possesser
Aux: Auxiliary verb Prt: Particle
C/Comp: Complementizer Q: QuantiIier
CP: Complementizer Phrase QA: Quantity Adjective
D/Det: Determiner S: Sentence
Dat: Dative SC: Small Clause
DP: Determiner Phrase Sg: Singular
I/InIl: InIlection Spec: SpeciIier
IP: InIlection Phrase T: Tense
LF: Logical Form t: trace
N: Noun V: Verb
Neg: Negation VP: Verb Phrase
Nom: Nominative UG: Universal Grammar
Num: Number









14

















15


I. THE GENERAL PICTURE



1. 1he 1argeted Issue
The object oI the present book, its ,targeted issue`, is to give
an account oI the syntactic potential oI English in the realm oI
preaication at the level oI Iinite simple sentences. Actually, the
analysis oI the syntactic relation oI preaication, holding between the
Subject oI the sentence, usually expressed by a nominal phrase
(NP), and the predicating phrase, expressed by a Verb Phrase (VP),
involves the description oI a subtle interplay between syntax and
semantics. An adequate interpretation oI the data can only be reached,
thereIore, iI one resorts to a theoretical Irame that integrates the level
oI syntactic representation with the level oI logical and semantic
representation.
Consider the Iollowing sentences, each oI which is based on a
single predicate:
(1)
a. Those kids are quite fanciful.
b. Those kids have blue rucksacks.
c. Those kids are giggling.
d. Those kids are picking daffodils.

We notice that the Iour sentences are analyzable into two immediate
constituents, an identical Noun Phrase (NP) and a structurally and
semantically distinct Verb Phrase (VP). The Iormer Iunctions as
Subject, and it is always placed in English declarative sentences in
initial, pre-verbal position. We also notice that, in a way similar to
Subjects in other languages, Romanian included, the English Subject
expresses what the sentence is about, i.e. the topic shared by all the
Iour sentences.
However, the actual core oI each oI the sentences, the nucleus
oI the respective syntactic conIiguration, as well as the clue to the
16
global meaning oI each sentence is the second group oI words, the
Verb Phrase, Iunctioning as Predicate Phrase. It represents the most
important segment oI the sentence Irom an inIormative point oI view,
as it conveys a Iresh comment on the same, seemingly known reIerent
oI the Subject ,those kids. We also notice that the heavy load oI
meaning carried by the predicating verb phrase correlates with a
distinct verbal structure, which seems to be ,specialized` Ior
expressing similar states or events.
Take, Ior instance, the meaning contribution oI each
Predicate. The Iirst and the second assign properties to the reIerent oI
the Subject, the third and the Iourth inaicate activities perIormed by
the same reIerent oI the Subject. Still there are important semantic
diIIerences between the states expressed by the (1)-a and b sentences,
and between the activities in sentences (1) -c and d.
In the Iirst sentence the predication is based on two
constituents: the meaningless verb BE and the real carrier oI meaning,
the one that denotes the property / attribute oI being quite fanciful. The
latter is realized grammatically by an Aafectival Phrase (AP),
Iunctioning as Preaicative. In the second sentence the Subject Noun
Phrase expresses the possessor oI some physical objects (the blue
rucksacks); the relation oI possession is rendered by a distinct
predicate structure, specialized Ior this relational meaning. This is a
Jerb Direct Obfect conIiguration headed by the prototypical
relational verb in English, the verb HAVE, which selects the thing
possessed as Direct Object.
The third and Iourth sentences are predicated by activitv
verbs, but in (1)-c the activity (oI giggling) involves the participation
oI a single actant, playing the role oI Agent, while in (1)-d the activity
(oI picking), carried out by the Agent (same reIerent), is undergone by
an actant whose role is that oI Patient. The predication is transitive,
involving two roles in its logical structure.
Notice also that the BE occurrences in sentence (1)-a versus
sentences (1)-c and d are but Iurther prooIs oI verb subcategorization:
the BE in the Iirst sentence belongs to the subcategory oI copular/link
verbs, while the one in the last two sentences is an auxiliary that
marks the Continuous aspects.
17
The present textbook is a survey oI svntactic classes of verbs /
verb subcategories described in close inter-relation with their
meaning, which is interpreted in terms oI a given logical argument
structure pertaining to each. Cutting across this ample verb domain
there is a syntactic boundary that is classically called transitivitv, by
which all grammarians mean the requirement oI the verb to co-occur
with a kind oI ,sister`, a Noun Phrase Iunctioning as Direct Object.
As we have pointed out in our Forewora, this domain lends
itselI to shiIts Irom one subcategory to another, shiIts that are
considered to be instances oI recategori:ation. Thus, in various
sections oI this book we shall comment on the ,Iloating nature oI
transitivity that lies at the basis oI recategorization processes, be they
Irom intransitive to transitive (e.g. The voung mare is galloping ---
The teen-ager is galloping the voung mare) or vice-versa, Irom
transitive to intransitive (e.g. Someone sola the tabloia rapialv--- The
tabloia sola rapialv).
InIormation about subcategorization Ieatures, argument
structures and recategorization possibilities regarding the verb items in
a given language is included in the overall list oI lexical items that is
commonly known as IEXICON. In this book we shall have as main
target the Iexicon description oI the main verb subcategories in
English. But in order to Iully comprehend this targeted issue, we shall
have to see where is the Lexicon placed in the general lay-out oI the
grammar which have decided to adopt as theoretical frame, a task that
we hope to IulIill partly by the Iollowing account oI ,the general
picture, partly by convincing the reader to resort to other important
sources(1).
We also have to warn the student that although the theoretical
Irame we have opted Ior is categorial (i.e. it operates with lexical
categories such as Nouns, Verbs etc., with subcategories within one
category, e.g. verb subcategories, as well as with svntactic categories
such as Phrases: Noun Phrases, Verb Phrases etc.), there will be
wherever necessary intrusions` Irom Iunctional` and/or relational`
grammar approaches. The primes the latter are working with are
notions such as ,Subfect-of, ,Obfect-of a.s.o. This heterogeneous
assemblage might be excusable iI we consider again our targeted
18
issue, which is the study oI the relation oI preaication and oI the
Iunction oI Preaicate/Preaicator in simple sentences.
Our targeted issue, thereIore, has a twoIold nature, both
categorial and functional/relational. The predominant conceptual
apparatus will be drawn Irom the Irame oI the categorial grammar
model presented below, but part oI the interpretation oI the data and oI
the explanations given will be inspired Irom the Iunctional and/or
relational models oI syntax. Both types oI models, however, share one
important aspect: they have a universal component (see the very name
oI one oI the variants oI Relational Grammar: Universal Svntax)
which captures the most general principles that govern syntactic
phenomena cross-linguistically.

1.1. Universal Grammar (UG) as Theoretical Frame
In order to supply a thorough description oI English verb
classes/subcategories we shall have to place predicating items and
phrases in the larger context oI the Grammar construct we have
chosen as FRAME. This is mainly based on the Theorv of Government
ana Binaing (Chomsky 1981) (3) the major outcome oI 20
th
century
generative linguistics. The latter which was inaugurated by the earliest
version oI a generative grammar, known as the Stanaara Moael oI
Generative Transformational Grammar (Chomsky 1965). In between
these two landmarks in time there was a succession oI variants
representing reIinements and improvements oI the initial Standard
theory.
Chomsky`s 1981 proposals, labelled Ior short as the GB
Theorv, came to also be reIerred to as the Universal Grammar (UG)
model or the Principles ana Parameter (P&P) Theory. These two
alternative labels have been determined by the basic assumptions oI
the model concerning:
a) the universallv sharea properties oI natural languages which Iorm
invariant systems
b) the particular properties oI natural languages representing cross-
linguistic diIIerences, possibly described as variables
19
The UG theory captures both aspects under the Iorm oI very general
principles/subtheories that account Ior the universal properties and
sets oI parameters Ior the language specific ones.
In order to easily comprehend the present material, the reader is
required to revise some oI the basic linguistic concepts deIined and/or
explained in the sources indicated in (1).

1.2. Cross-linguistic Principles as Invariants
Universally valid principles regard the properties and
mechanisms that apply cross-linguistically, that is to all natural
languages. They actually represent language invariant universals, the
quest oI which was the goal oI classical analvtical structuralism
(CAS) (2)
Within its comprehensive Irame UG establishes a set oI
general principles that operate in all languages. Take, Ior instance the
heaaeaness principle, according to which all constituents oI the type
PHRASE (representing maximal syntactic groups made up oI smaller
constituents) obligatorily include a heaa or nucleus. This head, be it a
Noun (N), a Verb (V), an Adjective (A) , an Adverb (Av) or a
Preposition (P) is the most important element oI the whole
construction, the one that Iurther selects a complement. The cluster
Iormed by a head and its complement(s) represents the major svntactic
categorv called PHRASE. Here are examples oI the main Phrase types
in English: essav on frienaship (Noun Phrase /NP)), write an
application (Jerb Phrase / JP), uncommonlv beautiful (Aafectival
Phrase / AP), verv earlv ( Aaverbial Phrase / AvP), into the garage
(Prepositional Phrase / PP).
In its turn, the heaaeaness principle is based on another
universal principle, according to which language is structurea, i.e.
hierarchically organized. Indeed, irrespective oI the language type or
Iamily, languages are analyzable as structured linguistic codes, rather
than as sequences oI items, simply Iollowing or preceding each other.
Thus, linguists have discovered that the sentence, which is almost
universally the basic unit oI language, analyzable as a binary
constituent structure: the concatenation oI a Subfect Noun Phrase with
a Preaicate Jerb Phrase. The order oI the two constituents varies
20
parametrically, depending on the wora oraer type each language
belongs to (Subject-Verb-Object, Subject-Object-Verb, Verb-Subject-
Object etc.), but sentential structure always includes these immediate
constituents.
Knowleage of the universal principles is a component oI the
mental store we are all born with. The child possesses UG as an initial
state. It is a cognitive Iaculty like many others, the language facultv
we are all endowed with. This Iaculty Iunctions as a language
acquisition device. The general principles Iorm the initial state that
represents a common cognitive Iund shared by all human beings and
making language acquisition possible.

1.3. Parameters as Variables
The moment the child is exposed to language experience in a
given speech community, the language facultv it possesses innately is
activated and a particular language is gradually and unconsciously
acquired. The result is not a unique language spoken by people all
over the world, but a particular language, with certain properties that
lend it speciIicity. The general principles do operate, but they coexist
with a set oI parameters whose value is Iixed distinctly by linguistic
experience.
The hypothesis oI parametric variation across languages
proves to hold iI we resort to language speciIic phenomena and data.
We have already seen that all sentences and phrases are structured,
sharing elements like the heaa (oI a phrase) or the Subfect and
Preaicate (oI a sentence). However, wora oraer is subject to
parametric variation: languages can be subdivided into heaa-first (like
English) and heaa-last (like Japanese).
The expression oI the Subject in surIace structure occurs
obligatorily in languages like English, German and French, while
Romanian and Italian allow the dropping/omission oI the Subject in
sentential contexts where the inIlection signals the person and number
reIerred to. This division into two groups oI languages Irom the point
oI view oI the presence or possible/allowed absence oI the Subject is
captured by the above-mentioned theory through the so-called pro-
arop parameter. By way oI illustration compare the English and
21
Romanian sentential structures below in point oI the presence or
absence oI the Subject in surIace structure and oI the way it is
expressed (iI any):
(2)
a. I was wearing a top hat and tails at the car show.
b. Purtam joben si Irac la expozi ia de masini.
(3)
a. It was drizzling.
b. Burni a.
(4)
a. It was necessary that urgent steps shoula be taken.
b. Era necesar s se ia m suri urgente.
(5)
a. There were three apple-trees in the middle oI the orchard.
b. Erau trei meri n mijlocul livezii.

The contexts above illustrate several situations in which the
Romanian Subject is null, while the English one is expressed in
surIace structure. In (1)-a the I` Subject is obligatorily present in
English, otherwise the sentence would be incorrect
(ungrammatical/ill-Iormed): *Was wearing. In (1)-b there is no
expressed Subject, but person and number reIerence to the deep-
structure Subject eu` is recovered by means oI the inIlection marker
on the Imperfect Iorm oI the Predicate, which is placed initially. In
sentence (3)-a expressing a weather phenomenon, English Iills the
Subject position by an impersonal it, while the Romanian version in
(3)-b is subjectless. In (4)-a another type oI it, labelled as
anticipatorv has been inserted as surIace Iiller oI the Subject oI the
main clause. This it` anticipates the Subject Clause that urgent steps
shoula be taken, so that we come to have two Subjects in the
respective complex sentence (the corresponding Romanian equivalent
oI the latter term is fra: ). The Romanian equivalent in (4)-b only
includes the extraposed Subject Clause.
In (5)-a the dummy Subject ,there` is used to occupy the
Subject position, while the actual deep` or logical` Subject - ,three
apple-trees- is placed aIter the existential verb BE. In (5)-b the initial
22
position is unoccupied, we only identiIy the deep Subject in post-
verbal position.
The pro-arop parameter allows all the Iive contexts in
Romanian to go without a surIace subject, which is disallowed in a
language like English, French or German.
In conclusion, the P&P Irame is quite advantageous Ior such
cross-linguistic analyses, in that the universal principles take care oI
identical or similar phenomena, while the parameters explain
language-speciIic diIIerences.

2. Crammar as a Model of Competence
Once we conceive a language as being a Iaculty/property oI
the human mind, the model oI grammar the linguist hypothetically
sets up should reIlect the way in which users oI a particular language
come to create` language stretches (which are both meaningIul and
well-structured) and to understand these stretches properly, despite the
novelty oI most oI the respective language tokens. Ianguage users
possess, thereIore, some special mental abilities that enable them to
communicate by such newly produced sentences. The receivers oI the
new sentences are able to decode them correctly, i.e. to assign them
the proper semantic interpretation. Two cognitive processes are,
thereIore, involved in this interchange oI structured linguistic material:
a) the formation of sentences which all users evaluate as correct/
grammatical/well-Iormed in a particular language; b) the correct
interpretation / comprehension oI these newly Iormed sentences.
The clue to these complex mental processes seems to be the
existence in the human mind oI a tacit, internali:ea knowleage oI the
system of principles and rules that govern and orient the whole
language-producing and decoding mechanism. This hidden, abstract
knowledge represents, according to Chomsky, our linguistic
Competence. Man`s knowledge oI a system made up oI a Iinite set oI
principles and rules has to be distinguished Irom our Performance oI
linguistic material, which means the speakers` actual use oI language
in a given context. PerIormance is sensitive to social and
psychological Iactors, which may Iacilitate or hinder it, depending on
the context oI situation, on memory limitations a.s.o.
23
The grammar we have chosen as a central Irame does not aim
at describing perIormance matters. It uniquely concentrates on the
description oI Competence, in terms oI a system oI principles and
rules all human beings possess uniIormly.
The native members oI a given speech community who have
acquired a particular language, their mother tongue, tacitly know both
the general rules and those that are speciIic to their language.
Iinguistic experience Iixes diIIerent values in the area oI parameters,
which explains the variation oI the same core` oI principles across
natural languages.

2.1. The Property of Grammaticality
Native speakers oI a language are able to estimate whether
sentences produced in the language they know are well-formea, i.e.
grammatical or ill-formea, i.e. ungrammatical. Thus native speakers oI
English will all agree that the Iirst sentence in the pairs below is
grammatical, while the second one is deviant Irom the rules they intuitively
know. This second sentence is marked by an asterisk that indicates
ungrammaticality/ill-Iormedness:
(6)
a. Brian alwavs sits up late.
b. * Brian sits up late alwavs.
(7)
a. Brian bought a Tovota Ior $ 4000.
b. *Brian bought Ior $ 4000 a Tovota.
(8)
a. Brian considered it necessary to cable that message.
b. *Brian considered necessary to cable that message.

In (6)-b the adverb oI Irequency alwavs is placed at the end oI the sentential
string, instead oI being inserted between the Subject and the Verb, thus also
producing an unacceptable sequence oI temporal adverbs (*late alwavs). In
(7)-b another rule oI English has been violated: the Direct Object is
separated Irom its transitive governing verb by the quantiIying adverbial
indicating price. In (8)-b the Iormal anticipatory Direct Object it` which is
obligatorily present in such conIigurations has been dropped. Most oI these
24
violations regard rules oI English syntax like word order rules or rules
concerning the obligatory occurrence in surIace structure oI certain
constituents. In another language, such as Romanian, Ior instance, these
rules do not operate, as Romanian has a relatively free wora oraer and it
also allows structures like (8)-b. This proves that the property oI
grammaticalitv varies with each and every language, being based on the
observance oI the speciIic language rules.
Part oI the grammatical competence oI native speakers is their
ability to interpret semantically strings that contain the same lexical items
arranged in a diIIerent way, e.g.:
(9)
a. Brian aamires Miriam.
b. Miriam aamires Brian.

The psychological verb aamire indicates in (9)-a a positive Ieeling
experienced by Brian (hence the role Experiencer marking the Subject)
with regard to Miriam (the Direct Object bearing the role Theme). In the
second sentence the two roles are reversed, so that the global meaning oI
(9)-b is altogether diIIerent. The syntactic Iunctions oI Subject and Object
are associated with diIIerent roles. But in case the predicate is svmmetric,
the two Iunctions (and the corresponding roles) are reversible and the two
sentences are roughly synonymous e.g.:
(10)
a. Brian marriea Miriam.
b. Miriam marriea Brian.

Native speakers are able to distinguish between degrees oI
grammaticality`. They can evaluate the extent to which a sentence
deviates Irom the rules` they unconsciously know and apply. Thus
speakers oI English will always consider sentence (11)-a to be better
constructed than (11)-b, which appears, in its turn, to be more
acceptable than (11)-c:
(11)
a. Donkeys have long ears.
b. * Donkeys has long ear.
c.** Has long ear donkeys.

25
While the Iirst sentence is Iully grammatical, the second one inIringes
the rules oI Agreement twice, and the third one also violates the basic
word order rule oI English: Subfect Jerb Obfect.
Thus, given several sentences that violate one or several
rules oI grammar, native speakers oI English can even establish a
`scale oI grammaticality`, similar to the one illustrated by (11)-a, b,
and c. In conclusion, grammatical competence enables speakers to
correctly interpret strings oI grammatical and lexical units. They are
able to analyse mentally the sentences they are exposed to in terms oI:
a. constituents that Iorm a hierarchical structure (mainly Phrases /
Groups oI words round a head, e.g. NP, VP, AP etc.) and
b. grammatical relations, such as Subfect Preaicate, relevant to
Agreement, Preaicate Obfect, relevant to the morphological case
marking the Object (transitive verbs, Ior instance, assign the
Accusative case to their Direct Object) or Subject Object, a relation
which is essential Ior passivization (the transIormation oI an active S
conIiguration into a passive one).

3. 1he Organization of Crammar
The reader endowed with a linguistic grounding is likely to
remember that model-based grammars, like the generative-
transformational grammar, have a precise internal organi:ation. This
is oI particular interest to us, as we shall be concerned with an
important slice` oI the Iexicon, the one including all the verbs in
English, as well as part oI the adjectives, i.e. those that can realize
predication.
Iike GT Grammar, the present model has got a Ioundation
layer`, a BASE. This Base is made up oI:
a) The LEXICON, which is the (ideally) complete list or
inventory oI the words/lexical items in the respective
language. Being similar to a dictionary, it is conceived as
having lexical entries which contain all the inIormation
necessary Ior the correct insertion/use oI lexical items in the
structures derived according to the rules operating in the
syntax oI the respective language. For each and every word
the Lexicon indicates the set oI phonological, syntactic and
26
semantic properties that are speciIic to the respective item.
Besides, the inIormation about a predicating item includes its
argument structure which is marked Ior the thematic roles it
co-occurs with. Reconsider our analysis oI sentences (1) c and
d as illustration oI activitv verbs which diIIer in point oI
number and notional status oI the arguments they take: giggle
is a one-argument verb, an intransitive that takes an Agent
role in Subject position, while pick is a two-argument verb,
thereIore a transitive verb that takes an external Agent as
Subject and a Patient as Direct Object. The thematic roles
marking the arguments Iorm the theta-gria oI the respective
item, its thematic structure.

b) The SYNTAX or categorial component whose rules operate
on syntactic and lexical categories so as to produce well-
Iormed syntactic conIigurations. These are represented as
basic, underlying D-Structures. This level oI representation
roughly corresponds to the Standard concept oI deep
structure`, by which Chomsky used to mean, within the GT
Irame, the underlying syntactic structure upon which
sentential meaning is determined. Indeed at this level, the
syntactic and lexical Ieatures oI verbal items are projected
Irom the Iexicon. Besides, the thematic structure oI the verb,
its theta-gria, is also projected on the D-Structure. This
component contains rules that constrain the Iormation oI
sentences and govern the way thematic (theta) roles are
assigned to the appropriate arguments taken by the verb. They
also harmonize the grammatical relations whose core is the
verb with the proper theta-marked positions to be occupied by
the arguments expressed by nominals (NPs).
An essential subcomponent oI the Base is the X-bar theorv of
svntactic representation, a theory according to which the main
linguistic entities / objects /units in a language at the level oI
syntax, i.e. the Phrases, are projected as enaocentric
constructions. This means that the representation oI such
groups has to observe certain (restricted) combinatorial
formulae, sharing one common structural property that oI
27
having a head or nucleus round which the other Phrase
constituents are distributed. In principle this obligatory head is
represented as X (e.g. the Noun in a Noun Phrase, The
Adjective in a Adjectival Phrase etc.), it being possibly
preceded by a Specifier (Spec) and Iollowed by a
Complement. The position oI these neighbouring constituents
is a variable which depends on the word order type oI the
respective language. In English the Spec is placed to the leIt
oI the head, while the Complement occupies the right hand
position as to the same head. (e.g. the Adjectival Phrase quite
afraia of snakes is analysable into the head afraia, preceded
by the Specifier (Degree Aaverb) quite and Iollowed by a
Prepositional Phrase in Complement position)
More on the rule system that applies to Phrase Structure
representation according to the X-bar convention will be Iound by the
reader in section 4.
c) The SYNTAX also includes a transformational component
general rule oI movement - Move- . This rule can move a
constituent (oI any syntactic structure) to a position which
already exists at the D-Structure, being, thereIore available at
the respective stage oI derivation. The moved constituent
leaves behind a trace t co-indexed with dislocated element.
Here is how half-passive or miaale constructions like:
(12)
a. This linen washes well.
b. Dust brushes easilv.

get Iormed by movement oI the D-Structure NP Iunctioning as
Direct Object (theta-marked Ior the role Patient) to the emptv
|e| position oI Subject oI the whole sentence:
(13)
D-Structure: Move S-Structure

|e| washes this linen well---------- This linen
i
washes t
i
well

|e| brush aust easily --------- Dust
i
brushes t
i
easily

28
The moved constituent and the trace Iorm a chain of co-
indexed elements, with the diIIerence that the trace, which
has become part oI the S-Structure lacks a phonetic shape.
S-Structure is slightly diIIerent Irom the Standard notion oI surface
structure in that it plays an important part in the semantic
interpretation oI sentences.
S-Structure is subject to Iurther processing by two other
levels: one is the level oI Phonological Form PF, the other is on the
level oI Logical Form - LF. Here is a schematic picture oI the
organization oI this grammar:
(14)
LEXICON

D-STRUCTURE

Move-


S-STRUCTURE

PHONOLOGICAL FORM LOGICAL FORM
(PF) (LF)


The Phonological Form level provides inIormation which is relevant
to the articulatory system, as well as to the intonational rules. The
Iogical Form level supplies the semantic interpretation oI
grammatical structure, mainly in terms oI argument structures.

3.1. The Derivation of Syntactic Structures
The lexical entry Ior the lexical items (words) in the Iexicon
oI a particular language has to contain all the inIormation which is
relevant and necessary Ior the proper insertion oI the respective items
in their base-positions at the level oI D-Structure. According to their
properties speciIied in the Iexicon they come to Iorm basic strings.
The constituents oI these strings can Iurther participate in the process
29
oI deriving other syntactic structures, whose constituents are arranged
in a diIIerent way. This reordering oI the basic constituents is the
output oI the only transIormational rule oI grammar: Move- . This
movement rule applies only on syntactic constituents (e.g. Phrases like
NPs, APs, etc.), bringing about the Iormation oI terminal strings at the
level oI S-Structure. The whole process oI sentence formation is,
thereIore, a derivation Irom the Base with items supplied by the
Lexicon to D-Structure and then to S-Structure (through Move , iI
necessary). Terminal strings represent the Iinal output oI the
derivational process which reaches the level oI S-structure. Here the
lexical items are arranged according to the requirements oI the wora
oraer rules operating in the respective language. In questions
(interrogative sentences), Ior instance, the derivation starts Irom a
D-Structure having the basic wora oraer oI aeclarative sentences.
Take the Iollowing example describing (in a simpliIied Iorm) the
derivation oI a partial ( wh- Question):
(15)
1oan was speaking to whom ------ 1o whom was 1oan
speaking?

(16) Analysis of the derivation
a. D-Structure is made up oI:
Subject (NP) Aux - V - Prepositional Object (PP), target
oI questioning expressed by an interrogative pronoun
b. Move applies twice: on the questioned constituent
deriving the Question and on the auxiliary (Subject-Auxiliary
Inversion)

The result is the interrogative string:
(17)
1o whom
j
was
i
1oan t
i
speaking t
j
?

c. S-Structure is made up oI:
1. The moved Prepositional Phrase expressed by a wh-word in
sentence-initial position. We notice that it still Iunctions as
Prepositional Object, preserving the thematic (theta) role and
the morphological case it received initially Irom the verb
30
speak (the role is Goal and the corresponding syntactic
Iunction is Indirect Object)
2. The movea auxiliarv in pre-subject position.
Both movements are obligatory Ior the correct derivation oI the
respective partial question.
The respective S-Structure is given the phonological interpretation oI
a question by the PF component and the semantic interpretation oI an
interrogative sentence by the IF component. The Iull-Iledged question
is thus the Iinal output oI the whole grammar apparatus.

3.2. The Constituent/Phrase Structure of the Sentence/Clause
Sentences used independently (as Simple Sentences based on
one predication) or as Clauses (i.e. coordinate or subordinate
constituents in bigger sentential constructs corresponding to the
Romanian ,Iraz ) are organized hierarchicallv. They are analyzable
into immeaiate constituents, which are decomposable, in their turn,
into another layer oI smaller constituents.
Given the simple sentence:
(18)
The actors shoula rehearse their parts before the show.

We can identiIy units of svntactic structure / constituents by using an
old structural technique, constituent demarcation by square brackets.
The result roughly appears as:
(19)
[[[The{[actors{{[[shoula{ [[ rehearse{ [[their{[ parts{{
[[before{ [the show{{{

This representation based on bracketed constituents uncovers correctly
the major sentence constituents a Aoun Phrase (the actors)
Iunctioning as Subfect and a Jerb Phrase in which the transitive verb
(rehearse) selects a right-hand ,sister` the Noun Phrase (their parts)
Iunctioning as Direct Obfect. In their turn the respective Phrases are
decomposed into their immediate daughters`, Determiner (Det): the
deIinite article in the Subject NP and the Possessive Determiner in the
Object NP, both placed in SpeciIier position, beIore the Noun head,
the Preposition (P) before Iollowed by its Complement, the NP the
show` etc. But still two questions remain unanswered:
31
What criteria /prooIs have we got that this identiIication is valid?
II we assume that these constituents Iorm a hierarchy, which is the
topmost constituent, the head oI this construction?

The answer to question 1 is to be supplied under 3.1. The
second question will be answered under 4.1. and 5.1.

3.3. Constituent Identification
In order to answer the Iirst question we need some inIormal
and Iormal pieces oI evidence that strings` are structured, i.e. that
they are made up oI constituents that speakers identiIy uniquely
(unambiguously). The inIormal prooIs are based on intuition, as
shown by our tentative bracketing above, mainly springing Irom our
Ieeling` that certain words only go with` or combine with items like
determiners, modiIiers a.s.o. Adverbial ModiIiers like the beIore-
Phrase above go well with` the whole VP or the whole clause, but
hardly ever combine with Noun heads a.s.o.
We have also noticed that the structure oI the sentence has a level-
wise organization. The Iirst level includes phrases made up oI
words/lexical items whose combination makes sense`: the deIinite
article the` speciIies the plural Noun `actors` and the Possessive
determiner their` speciIies the plural Noun parts`. We intuit that this
semantic association oI a determiner and a noun is correct, since
determiners never go with` other parts oI speech. But we still need
some Iormal prooIs that our identiIication oI constituents is correct.
One oI the classical Iormal criteria used in constituent identiIication is
substitution by another item or phrase. Thus both the NPs in the
sentence above can be replaced by pronominal items: the nominative
NP the actors can be substituted by the pronominal item they,
while the accusative NP their parts can be replaced by them. This
type oI substitution is called pronominalization.
The whole VP can also be substituted by should do it, a kind oI pro-
verb Iorm.
Ellipsis / omission or aeletion can apply on identical VPs in certain
contexts, e.g.:
(20)
Tabitha can paint cats, but I cant (paint cats).
32

Another Iormal means used to prove constituency is movement, as it is
only constituents that can be moved around in a sentence. Thus, in
order to Iorm a ves/no question out oI the declarative sentence in (18)
we have to move the Auxiliary constituent leItward so as to place it in
initial S position:
(21)
Shoula the actors rehearse their parts beIore the show?

This movement makes the Subject NP occupy the second position in
S-structure. Actually the two constituents are inverted or reordered
Another movement might apply on the Adverbial oI Time, realized
linguistically by the Prepositional Phrase (PP) beIore the show. This
PP proves to be a constituent because it can be moved in initial
sentence position, beIore the rest oI the string:
(22)
Before the show the actors should rehearse their parts.

Movements, which are stipulated in our model as being produced by
the strong transIormational rule move- , only operate on constituents.
However, constituents cannot move anywhere. Movement rules have a
highly constrained application. The targeted position Ior movement
has to be already available in the D-structure oI the respective
derivation.
Besides, one oI the strong constraints on movement is that a certain
constituent moves only iI it has to do so.
Another test that may help us identiIy a constituent regards the
possible focali:ation oI a constituent by moving it into the initial
segment oI a cleft sentence, as in:
(23)
a. It is the actors that/who should rehearse their parts (not the
prompter).
b. It is before the show that the actors should rehearse their
parts.

33
The simple sentence has become a complex one: we have ,cleIt` one
constituent (which we want to emphasize / Iocalize) and placed it in a
Main Clause made up oI the `emphatic- it` Subject and the copula BE.


3.4. Syntactic Categories: Phrases as Sentence Constituents
The constituents we have tested above are all groups oI words
round a lexical heaa, i.e. a meaningIul item belonging to a certain
class of woras/lexical categorv. Each lexical head requires a speciIic
internal arrangement/ distribution oI its constituents (to the leIt and to
the right). We shall provide below a rough description oI the main
phrases headed by lexical categories: Noun Phrases (NPs), Verb
Phrases (VPs), Prepositional Phrases (PPs), Adjectival Phrases
(APs) and Adverbial Phrases (AvPs).
We assume that any Phrase represents the (maximal) projection oI its
head. In the section devoted to the X-bar convention oI phrase
structure representation we shall supply the detailed Iormulae
applying to the representation oI the maximal projection (XP) oI the
head. This is marked with two bars (e.g. NP N``, VP V`` etc.), the
intermediate phrase is marked with a single bar (N`, V` etc.) and the
head is symbolized by X (N, V etc.). For the time being we
introduce only two oI the notions pertaining to the X-bar
representation oI Phrases:
(24)
a. the maximal projection is made up oI two constituents:
a Specifier to the leIt and a smaller X`
b. X` is made up oI the head X a Complement to the right

Here is the general representation oI Phrase Structure
according to this convention:
(25)
XP (X``)

Specifier X`

X Complement
34


3.4.1. The Structure ana Distribution of Noun Phrases (NPs)
A Noun Phrase is a headed string, in particular it is the
projection oI its Noun head. Consider the strings below:
(24)
a. the actress
b. the actress in the movie
c. two talented actresses
d. the actress who played Ophelia

The head actress(s) singular in (24)-a,b,d and plural in (24)-c has a
human reIerent with a precise meaning, essentially related to the
proIession oI acting.
The constituent to the leIt is a Determiner (a deIinite article,
a numeral) speciIies the deIiniteness or the quantity oI this reIerent.
There are many other types oI Determiners that may occur in Iront oI
head Nouns: indeIinite articles, demonstratives, possessives, indeIinite
quantiIiers a.s.o, each with its own semantic contribution. The
determiner can be overt, as in the examples above, or covert as in
the case oI zero articles (e.g. NPs like coffee, wine, girls, engineers).
Another constituent that may occur to the leIt is the Adjective
or Adjectival Phrase which modiIies the meaning oI the head Noun,
thus Iunctioning as Noun Modifier. In English it is placed in between
the Determiner and the head Noun as shown by (24)-c.
Other Noun Modifiers can be placed to the right oI the Noun
head. They can be phrasal (like the PP ,in the movie` in (24)-b or
clausal (as in (24)-d, where the head is modiIied by a whole relative
clause). We shall represent below the structure oI (24)-b in the
simpliIied terms oI the X-bar conventions supplied in 3.2. above.







35
(25)
NP

Specifier N`

Det
N Complement
the
actress PP

in the movie

NPs can be substituted by singular or plural pronouns. In the
case above : SHE Ior the singular phrases and THEY Ior the plural
ones.
NPs are distributed in Subject position (pre-verbal in
declaratives), Predicative position (aIter copulas or copula-like verbs)
and in Object position (Direct Object or non-prepositional Indirect
Object). Here are examples Ior each position/Iunction:
(25)
a. The voungest actress has won the Oscar. (Subject)
b. The Oscar winner is the voungest actress. (Predicative)
c. We all admired the voungest actress. (Direct Object)
d. The board awarded the voungest actress the Oscar prize.
(Indirect Object)

We notice that syntactic Iunctions and morphological case properties
are not inherent in the NP. It is the verb that selects the respective NP
in various positions/ Iunctions in the hierarchy oI the sentence. It is
the V or the preposition that assign case to the NPs they govern.
From a logical and semantic point oI view, the central role is again
played by the Verb. NPs realize grammatically the argument structure
oI the Verb. Each argument designating a participant in the event
denoted by V is an NP bearing a thematic role (Agent, Patient, etc.)

36
3.4.2. The Structure ana Distribution of Jerb Phrases (JPs)
The VP constituent is the Phrase round the Verb head or
nucleus. The argument structure oI the Verb determines the
conIiguration oI the sentence (which constituents are obligatory
complements oI the verb) as well as its meaning interpretation. The
whole VP Iunctions as preaication oI the sentence. Actually, the
description oI preaication tvpes is the targeted issue oI the present
book.
There are V items which select no Complement at all, in which case
they belong to the subcategory oI intransitives. II, on the contrary, the
V has to select a NP in Complement position it belongs the
subcategory oI transitives. Consider:
(26)
a. (Biras) chirp.
b. (Biras) eat grass.
c. (Biras) eat grass on airports.
In all these sentences the SpeciIier position is occupied by the
agentive Subject (the bracketed NP ,birds`). This has led linguists to
the hypothesis that the Subject is ,base-generated` in this SpeciIier
position at D-Structure level (the VP-internal hypothesis). To the right
intransitives like ,chirp` take no Complement, while transitives such
as ,eat` obligatorily select a Direct Object bearing the Patient role:
(27)
a. VP b. VP

Spec V` Spec V`

V V NP

Birds Birds N`

chirp eat N

grass

In the third sentence, however, there is one more constituent, the
optional Prepositional Phrase ,on airports`, which, as diIIerent Irom
37
the complement ,grass` is not an Object selected by the verb ,eat`.
Such optional constituents, usually indicating manner, place, time,
purpose, cause etc. are labelled as Adjuncts. They are adverbials and
their relation to the verb head is looser, as shown by the Iollowing
representation oI (26)-c:
(28) VP

Specifier V`

NP V` PP (Adjunct)


N` V NP P`

N` P NP

N N
Birds eat grass on airports


We notice that there are several layers` in the hierarchical
constituent structure oI the V head. The lowest one includes the V
head and its Direct Object in Complement position (this coincides
with the lowest V`). The higher V` includes the Adjunct (the PP).
Verb Phrases evince a great variety, which is determined by
the subcategorial Ieatures oI their V head. The various
subclasses/subcategories oI intransitives and transitives will be
extensively dealt with in the Iollowing chapters.
In point oI distribution, VPs occur at the simple sentence level, as
unique predicates oI the type Iinite` ( Agreement, Tense). They
may also occur in the context oI Compound and/or Complex
Sentences, as `Iinite` or non-Iinite` predicates oI embedded clauses.

38
3.4.3. The Structure ana Distribution of Aafectival Phrases ana
Aaverbial Phrases
Adjectival and Adverbial Phrases have a somehwat similar
internal structure, in that they can only consist oI a head, as in the sets
below:
(29)
a. Adjectives occurring as APs:
square, tall, cheekv, absura ,interesting etc.
b. Adverbs occurring as AvPs:
fast, recentlv, soon, obviouslv, carefullv etc.

These two lexical categories also share the grammatical category oI
Comparison which applies to the items that are gradable. Comparison
may be realized synthetically or analytically by means oI Iunctional
markers (specialized bound morphemes, e.g. er, -est Ior
monosyllabic As and Avs) or by degree words which occur in
SpeciIier position, to the leIt oI the head in the same position there
occur other QuantiIiers or ModiIiers oI the respective A or Av head:
(30)
a. APs with Specifiers: verv tall, quite interesting,
uncommonlv cheekv, rather outaatea, exceeainglv nice etc.
b. AvPs with Specifiers: too fast, verv soon, quite recentlv,
most carefullv etc.

Here is the representation oI such phrases:
(31)
a. quite interesting b. quite recentlv

AP AvP

Spec A` Spec Av`

quite A quite Av

interesting recently

39
The degree oI complexity oI APs can be greater than that oI AvPs, in
that the Iormer can also include Prepositional Phrases in Complement
position (to the right). This is the case oI the numerous Adjectives
with obligatory preposition, some oI which are mentioned
below:
(32)
APs with PPs as Complements:
aware of his mistake, aelightea with the music, surprisea at
the news, forgetful of names, tantamount to a aisaster etc.

Some the As above can select a clausal complement, in which case
the preposition is deleted/omitted:
(33)
a. Adjective heads with finite clausal complements:
aware [that he has been mistaken{, surprisea [ that she has
marriea{, content [that thev have overcome{
b. Adjective heads with non-finite clausal complements:
afraia [of being punishea{ Geruna Clause
pleasea [to meet the ambassaaor{ Infinitive Clause

The maximal projection oI APs can include both an Adverbial
SpeciIier and a Prepositional Object as Complement, as in fullv aware
of his mistake, represented below:
(34) AP

Spec A`

fully A PP
aware
of his mistake
40

Both APs and AvPs Iunction syntactically as Moaifiers,
diIIering, however greatly as to the head they modiIy. APs modiIy
Noun heads, occuring in SpeciIier position (e.g. a very gifted pianist).
AvPs modiIy V heads (e.g. The delegation reached the airport very
early) or whole Sentences (e.g. Unexpectedly, the baloon dropped on
the rooI ), generally Iunctioning as optional Adjuncts.
APs have, however, a Iar larger scope than AvPs as Iar as their
syntactic potential is concerned. They can take part in one oI the
important types oI intransitive predication the copulative one. When
distributed like that, APs assign properties to the reIerent oI the
Subject NP, e.g.:
(35)
a. The president`s speech was quite wittv.(copular BE AP)
b. My daughter has grown prettier. (copula-like V AP)

Predicative APs will be discussed extensively in Chapter 3, which is
devoted to composite preaications like the copulative one.

3.4.4. The Structure ana Distribution of Prepositional Phrases
Prepositions are invariant items in point oI Iorm (they have no
paradigms). As Iar as meaning is concerned, they vary along a scale
that has at one end meaningful prepositions (like the locative,
directional and temporal ones) and at the other end meaningless/
aberrant prepositions. Here are several examples oI meaningIul
prepositions which select an NP in Complement position:
(35)
a. We met the oIIicial guest at the airport. (locative)
b. The teenager rushed into the back vara. (directional)
c. The concert starts at 7.30 p.m. (temporal)
d. The clerk was writing in ink. (instrumental)
e. This team works for a private companv (purpose)

The syntactic Iunction oI PPs such as the ones illustrated above is that
oI Adverbial ModiIier (oI Place, Direction, Time, Manner, Purpose
etc.)
41
Prepositions Irequently occur as obligatory Ieatures oI Verbs and
Adjectives, in which case they are more oIten than not meaningless. In
their turn they take NPs as Complements. The respective PP selected
by a V or an A Iunctions as Prepositional Object oI the verbal or
adjectival head, respectively:
(36)
a. This pond abounas in trout.
b. Miss Jones looks after my son.
c. They are envious of our scientiIic Iindings.
d. She is proua of being a Romanian gymnast.

We notice that the Complement oI the prepositional head can also be
clausal. In (36)-d we have supplied a context in which the preposition
selects a Gerund complement clause.
Prepositions govern their complements. By virtue oI the dominance
relation they assign morphological case to the NP in complement
position. The case assigned to Objects oI prepositions in English is the
Accusative.

3.5. Functional Categories as Phrases Heads
In the section above we have reIerred to the analysis oI
syntactic conIigurations in terms oI immediate constituents, most oI
which proved to be phrases headed by lexical categories, characterized
by lexical content (the Iormer major parts oI speech`) These lexical
categories represent open sets oI word/lexical items loaded with
lexical / descriptive content. They Iorm the vocabulary oI each
language, Ialling into similarly behaved parts-oI speech` like Nouns,
Verbs, Adjectives, Adverbs and Prepositions. This lexical store can be
perpetually enriched by wora formation processes. Each oI the items
belonging to the above mentioned classes` can head a Phrase, as has
been shown by our description oI Noun Phrases (e.g. that fluffv aog),
Verb Phrases (e.g. swallow a pill), Adjectival Phrases (e.g. quite
afraia of snakes), Adverbial Phrase (e.g. verv far) and Prepositional
Phrases (e.g. with a stick).
42
Given the Iact that UG is a categorial grammar, we have to Iurther see
iI there are other categories that can occur as heads oI
phrases/constructions.
The Syntax also includes functional categories that Iorm closed sets
oI items which have the role oI `grammatical tools` , `markers` or
`Iormatives`, i.e. items that take part in grammatical processes. From a
morphological point oI view they can occur as Iree morphemes
(e.g. an, most, several etc.) or bound morphemes (e.g. -s, -ea, -
er, -est etc.)
Functional categories are classes oI specialized items (oIten
subclassiIied into smaller groups) which mark the grammatical status
and behaviour oI nominal, verbal, adjectival or adverbial items, such
as:
DETERMINERS (Det/D), a cover term Ior Articles (deIinite,
indeIinite or zero), Possessives, Demonstratives etc.
DEGREE WORDS, specialized Ior quantiIication and comparison oI
Adjectives and Adverbs (e.g. quite, verv, much, more, most etc.)
INFIECTION (I), a cover term Ior the whole cluster oI the verbal
categories oI Agreement (with the Subject NP), Tense, Mood and
Aspect
COMPIEMENTIZERS (Comp) specialized Ior introducing Iinite or
non-Iinite Complement Clauses (e.g. conjunctions like that, if etc.,
particles and/or prepositions Ior InIinitival or Gerundial Complements
etc.)
Phrases can be headed by functional categories as well. Thus a Noun
Phrase may be alternatively described as a Determiner Phrase (DP) in
which the Determiner selects a NP Complement (e.g. those, a
Demonstrative Det selects a plural NP signaling remoteness oI the
respective entity).

3.6. The Sentence as an Inflection Phrase (with Inflection
as Functional Head)
Simple Sentences and Clauses (Sentences within Compund
and/or Complex Sentences) used to be described as exocentric
constructions (lacking a head). With the emergence oI UG the
heaaeaness / enaocentricitv principle has been generalized so that, as
43
suggested by the representation below, it has extended to the major
syntactic category S as well as Clause.
Indeed the sentence actually represents a maximal PHRASE round a
head the composite constituent Inflection (I ). ThereIore, the
Sentence can be described as a hierarchical structure projected as an
Inflection Phrase (IP). This representation applies the X-bar
convention (see section 4), according to which the maximal projection
(here IP) branches into a Specifier oI the head to the leIt and a
Complement oI the same head to the right. The SpeciIier position is
occupied by the Subject NP, the Complement position is Iilled by the
predicate phrase VP:
(37)
IP

Spec I

NP I VP (Complement)



Pro-N V NP (Complement)



They |Agr| -ed donate their money

We notice that the head - I
O
- includes functional constituents
that are obligatory Ior any simple sentence or Iinite clause:
Agreement (Agr) with the Subject NP, which is implicit/covert/
invisible in this context
the Tense marker ea, by means oI which the respective event is
temporally oriented as previous to Speech Time
The VP is also a headed phrase. The head is the transitive V which
selects as Complement the NP their money`.
In (38) we shall supply the representation oI the S analyzed in 3.6. as
an Inflection Phrase. The sentence has been reduced to its obligatory
constituents (by omitting the Adjunct beIore the show`). We have
44
introduced the Ieatures necessary Ior the correct selection oI the items
in the terminal string. These Ieatures regard categorial selection
(c-selection) and semantic selection (s-selection).
We should also point out that this S/IP has undergone one
movement operation. II we agree to the hypothesis that the Subject NP
has been initially generated in Spec VP, where it cannot be assigned
morphological case, then movement of the Subfect upwards, in Spec IP
position has to apply. This S-Structure position oI the Subject is
considered to be canonical in languages like English, which have an
SVO dominant word order. It is in this position that the Subject NP
can receive case (the Nominative) Irom the head oI the sentence the
InIlection.
(38) IP

Spec I`


NP I VP

Det N V NP

Art Agr/T M V
+def] +N] +V]
+common] +__ NP] Det N
+human] -state] +Poss] +N]
-sg] abstract]
-sg]
The actors -ea shall rehearse their parts

The representation is simpliIied, in the sense that we have not yet
applied the requirements oI the X-bar convention to all the Phrases
that make up this sentence.

3.7. The Role of the Inflection Head of the Sentence
We have established that the sentence is an enaocentric phrase
round the head I, which is a composite constituent made up oI bound
morphemes like the Tense markers -s and ea, as well as Iree
morphemes as is the case oI auxiliary verbs (BE, HAVE, Modals)
45
This complex phrase inter-relates the major S constituents by
including the Agreement markers as obligatory inIlectional
constituents.
Actually, the InIlection head makes the sentence structure appear as
complete Irom a semantic and Iormal point oI view. Semantically, the
InIlection conveys inIormation about Tense ( the Tense marker signals
the temporal coordinate oI the event), about Aspect and about Mood
and modality tinges. II we drop the InIlection the sentence ceases to be
a sentence, despite the co-existence oI the two major constituents NP
and VP. Consider:
(39)
a. The client pays/ paid the bill. (Io Agr and T)
b. The client is paying the bill. (Io Agr, T, Asp)
c. The client must pay the bill. ( I o Agr, T, M)

by contrast with the string below which no longer represents a well-
Iormed sentence:
(40)
* The client pay the bill.

A more reIined view oI the Inflection Phrase is based on the
idea that each oI the morphemes specialized Ior Agreement, Tense,
Aspect, Mood, behaves like a Iunctional head oI a Phrase. Thus the IP
is interpreted as being `split` into a hierarchy oI smaller Phrases:
AgrP, TP, Asp, MoodP.
Auxiliary verbs in English are closed Iunctional classes oI items such
as the modals, or specialized markers oI aspect or voice like HAVE
(Ior the PerIective Aspect) and BE (Ior the Progressive Aspect and Ior
the Passive Voice). They are semantically poor, i.e. `light` verbs.
Unlike lexical verbs they never assign theta-roles.
The order in which the various markers, be they bound morphemes or
auxiliaries, appear in S-Structure is speciIic to each language. This
order is obtained by successive movements oI the markers ,Irom head-
to-head` (where the head positions are occupied by the Iunctional
morphological markers oI Tense, Aspect etc.) in the respective
language.
46
In English the S-Structure ordering oI auxiliaries requires
that modals (iI any) should be placed Iirst, under InIlection, the
second position in the string oI auxiliaries being occupied by HAVE
(iI the PerIective is marked), Iollowed by BE (iI the Progressive
Aspect or the Passive Voice is marked), e.g.:
(41)
a.The Joneses must have been living in Durham Ior years.
M PerI Progr
b.* The Joneses have must been living in Durham Ior years.

The last two auxiliaries have to move to InIlection, while lexical
(meaningIul) verbs never move to InIlection in English. Besides,
lexical verbs never undergo Subject-Auxiliary Inversion as genuine
auxiliary verbs do.

3.8. Clausal Constituents as Complementizer Phrases (CPs)
As we have repeatedly shown the simplest S conIiguration is
based on one predication, realized by a single Verb Phrase. Thus the
occurrence oI one predicating Verb Phrase is the main clue or criterion
Ior identiIying the sentential status oI a conIiguration. Another
characteristic oI a simple sentence is it should be Iinite`, i.e. its
InIlection head should include as obligatory constituents the
Iormatives/markers Ior Agreement and Tense.
II a sentence becomes a constituent oI a higher sentential unit it is
considered to be a Clause, which is described in the present Irame as a
Phrase having a Complementizer as head. The Complementizer is a
Iunctional category realized by means oI specialized conjunctions,
pronouns etc. which serve as Clause introducers. In the same position
we can Iind inverted auxiliaries. II the CP is a main clause the
complementizer position is vacant.
The structure oI the CP is made up oI the head and its Complement to
the right, a position in which we Iind an IP structure:
(42)
a. It is advisable |that he shoula behave himself|
b. It is advisable |for him to behave himself|

47
The Complement position is Iilled by a Iinite CP in (42)-a, an
embedded clause headed by the complementizer that`. In (42)-b the
same position is occupied by a non-Iinite CP, the InIinitive Clause,
headed by the complementizer Ior`. Both CPs Iunction as Subject
Clauses. Here is the representation oI the Iinite CP:
(43) CP

C`

C IP

that Spec I`

he I VP

shoula behave himself

3.9. Syntactic Categories of a Greater Complexity: The Compound
and Complex Sentence Types
Complementi:er Phrases (CPs)/ Clauses can be inter-related by
coordination or subordination.

3.9.1. Compouna Sentences
This type oI sentence is based on coordination oI confoinea
clauses that enjoy the same rank:
(44)
a. The liberals aebatea the proposal ana votea it aown.
b. The secretarv tvpea ana then printea the report, but she
aiant have the time to mail it that verv aav.

Minimally, a Compound Sentence is made up oI two conjoined CPs as
in (44)-a, but it may be extended to more than two coordinate clauses.
When the conjoined clauses share one constituent (e.g. the Subject in
the examples above) it can be omitted or substituted by the appropriate
pronominal Iorm.

48
3.9.2. Complex Sentences
The Complex Sentence evinces a higher degree oI structural
complexity. Minimally, it is made up oI a Main or Matrix Clause
(MC) and one Suborainate / Embeaaea Clause:
(45)
a.Recentlv I have reali:ea |that Scotsmen are quite generous.|
MC Iinite CP Direct Object Clause
b. It reallv surprises me [that Scotsmen are quite generous{
Iinite CP Subject Clause

The subordinate clauses above are finite CPs, being marked
Ior Agreement and tense. They are both introduced by the
complementizer that`, but they diIIer in point oI distribution
(syntactic Iunction). The Iirst occurs in Complement position,
Iunctioning as Direct Object Clause oI the transitive verb realize`.
The second is a Subject Clause anticipated by the anticipatory it` S-
Structure Subject. Embedded clauses (CPs) may have other
distributional properties as well. They may occur aIter copular BE,
thus Iunctioning as Predicative Clauses.
In the examples below the same position is occupied by non-
finite clauses - a Gerundial (Ger) Clause in (46)-a and an InIinitival
(InI) Clause in the same Complement position, where they are selected
by the transitive verb remember`:
(46)
a.Henrv aiant remember |posting the letter|
GerClause- Direct Object
b. Henrv rememberea |to post the letter|
InIClause Direct Object

Non-finite clauses lack the markers oI Agreemnt and Tense.
Although they are identical Irom a Iunctional point oI view,
the two CPs denote diIIerent meanings, which shows that one and the
same verb may sometimes bring about semantic diIIerences depending
upon the type oI CP it selects. The lexical entry oI the respective verb
will have to signal such selectional restrictions.

3.9.3. A Special Tvpe of CP the Small Clause
Clausal constituents labelled as Small Clauses are verbless`
sentential structures, made up oI a Subfect ana a Preaicative. The
49
latter may be adjectival, nominal or prepositional as shown by our
examples below:
(47)
a. We consiaer [talk shows quite attractivej
b. We consiaer [talk shows a waste of time{.
c. We consiaer [talk shows of no interest{.

The Direct Object clause selected by the transitive verb consider`
lacks the verbal constituent, still predication is realized by the
Predicative assigning a property to the logical` Subject talk shows`.
Quite oIten such Predicatives denote identity or result:
(48)
a. They appointed [Dr.James chairmanj (identity)
b. I banged [the aoor shut{ (result)

Notice that in S-Structure the deep/logical Subject oI the Small Clause
occurs as Accusative Object (DO) oI the verb in the Main Clause, as
proved by the pronominal Iorms in:
(49)
a. We consider them quite attractive.
b. They appointed him chairman.
c. I banged it shut.

This peculiarity makes such Complex sentences passivizable:
(50)
a. They were considered quite attractive.
b. He was appointed chairman.
c. The door was banged shut.

The Predicative in the passive structures above come to assign a
property to the surIace Subject oI each oI the sentences above.

3.9.4. Compouna Complex Sentences
The highest degree oI structural complexity characterizes
Sentences which are made up oI both coordinate and subordinate
clauses:
(51)
When the guiae reali:ea that the Etna haa eruptea again ana
that there were still tourists left behina near the crater, he
50
walkea back to rescue them, but the aark preventea him from
aavancing too fast.

4. 1he X-bar Convention for Phrase Structure Representation
The convention is based on the principle that any phrase or
cluster oI linguistic elements is dominated by a head or nucleus. We
have already shown that the UG model has Iormulated this as the
principle oI phrase enaocentricitv / heaaeaness.
According to this, every syntactic group/phrase XP is built round a
head (be it lexical or Iunctional) symbolized as X. This head is
maximally projected as XP or X`` (X with two bars) according to the
Iormula:
(52)
XP/ X`` (Specifier) - X`

Thus iI X` is a Verb Phrase made up oI a verb head and its
Complement (e.g. break the news) it can merge with an NP in
SpeciIier position like the speakers (thus Iunctioning as Subject).
They come to Iorm a bigger structure, which underlies the whole
sentence The speakers break the news.
In case the head is an N like poem and it Iorms a unit N`
together with its Complement of love we can Iurther place a SpeciIier
like each in Iront oI this N` and obtain each poem of love, the maximal
projection oI the respective head.
ThereIore, the intermediate projection X` includes the
obligatory complements (constituents that take part in
subcategorization), according to the Iormula:
(53)
X` X - Complement(s)

Complements are post-head sisters oI X
o
and correlate with argument
positions. Thus within VP (V``) the lower phrase level V` dominates
J and the Complement NP to the right, as in:




51
(54) V`

V NP (Complement position)

donate their money

To sum up, the two rules that take care oI the general Iormat oI
phrases are:
(55)
a. XP/ X`` (Specifier) - X`
b. X` X - YP/Complement(s)

We notice that Phrases are built and hence, represented
hierarchically, three levels being actually involved: the top (two bars)
maximal projection, the intermediate level (marked by one bar) and
the bottom level oI the head. The corresponding Phrase Marker
(graphic repesentation) is:
(56) XP

Spec X`

X YP (Complement)

This representation also brings into relieI similarities between phrases
belonging to distinct lexical categories /classes oI words / parts oI
speech. Consider the V` and N` representations below:
(57) V`
a.
V NP (Complement position)

donate their money






52
b. N`

N
0
PP (Complement position)

P`

P
0
NP
donation oI their money

We are struck by a number oI similarities between the two
Phrase Markers. The Verb head is completed` by the NP Iunctioning
as Direct Object, while the nominal derived Irom this V donation is
also completed` by an almost identical Noun ModiIier, but Ior the
Iact that the same NP the money` is governed by he Preposition
oI`.
II we were to construct the higher level represented by X``,
namely VP (V``) and NP (N``) we would have to add SpeciIiers to the
leIt oI each phrase. Here are two possible maximal projections:
(58)
Spec of V` : artistso resulting VP: Artists aonate their
monev.
Spec of N` : artistso resulting NP: Artists aonation of their
monev.

A strong parallelism holds between the two maximal
projections; at the level oI D-structure they take lexically identical
Subjects (only the marking is diIIerent). The logical` Subject oI
aonate and aonation is the same: the N artists playing the role oI
Agent in both cases. We might agree at this point with the hypothesis
that the Subject NP is base-generated within the VP, where it occupies
the SpeciIier position. This is known as the VP-internal hypothesis,
according to which the SpeciIier oI VP is the base-position oI the
Subject. This hypothesis has to be supported by Iurther arguments
related to theta-role assignment.

53
4.1. Head-Complement Dependencies
One oI the important consequences oI the application oI the
principle oI headedness lies in the Iact that heads subcategori:e Ior
their complements, rather than Ior their SpeciIiers or Ior their
Adjuncts (i.e. optional constituents outside the subcategorization
Irame). Thus transitive Verbs subcategorize Ior non-prepositional NPs
chosen as Complements and Iunctioning as Direct Objects, setting up
the class oI transitives versus the class oI intransitive prepositional
Js. The latter select PPs in Complement position, i.e. Iunctioning as
Prepositional Objects (e.g. emphasi:e an iaea (V`NP) versus insist on
an iaea (V`PP) or the more complex Irames oI transitive and
prepositional Vs like charge smb. with smth., blame smb. for
smth.(V`NP`PP)).
The head-complement relation presupposes the dependency oI
the constituent in complement position upon the verb. Indeed in the
transitive conIiguration above, the NP an iaea is marked by the
Accusative case only by virtue oI its being governed by the transitive
V head. Such dependency relations between a head oI a construction
and its dependent term are described by investigating the structural
relations holding between constituents (labelled as constituent-
commana/ c-commana relations) or between constituents and the
maximal projection oI the Phrase (labelled as m-commana relations)

4.2. Dominance Relations within Phrases: c-command and
m-command
We shall Iocus on the internal structure oI VPs, which
represent our targeted issue. Iet us take a string headed by a transitive
verb that takes an obligatory Complement, a sister`, as well as an
Adjunct, an optional PP Iunctioning as Adverbial ModiIier, e.g.
(59)
JP: play the piano in the living-room

The maximal projection oI this VP is represented by a Phrase Marker
showing that VP (actually coinciding with V``) branches into a
Specifier where the base-generated Subject occurs ( a position which
is not Iilled in our representation) and a V`which dominates a smaller
V` and the Adverbial Adjunct oI Place, expressed by a Prepositional
Phrase. Finally we reach the pre/terminal string made up oI the V head
- V and the NP directly governed by it.
54
60. VP

Spec V`

V` PP


V NP P`

P NP

plav the piano in the living-room

Our hypothesis, to be Iurther demonstrated is that the V plav
c-commanas the NP the piano, but it does not c-command the PP
Adjunct to the aoor. This is how the domain oI c-command is
outlined:

a) The domain oI c-commana depends on the
relations oI aominance i.e. on the relative position
oI the respective constituents in the hierarchy. A
constituent which is placed higher dominates a
lower constituent directly (immediate domination)
or indirectly (via another dominated constituent).
b) Neither oI the constituents involved in a c-command
relation should dominate the other one.
c) Besides this condition, the Iirst branching node
above the one that c-commands a constituent
should also dominate that node.

Iooking at the VP in (32) we notice that the NP the piano is
in the c-commana domain oI the verb plav as neither oI them
dominates the other one and they are both under the higher node V`.
We can sum up the conditions to be met by c-command using
the symbols and Ior the two constituents (in our example above
the V play and the NP the piano, respectively):
(61)
An element c-commands and element if:
a. does not dominate and does not dominate
b. the first branching node above also dominates
55

In case the Iirst branching node is a maximal projection oI the
head, namely an XP (or X``), the constituent m-commanas the
constituent . Resuming our example in (32), the verb head play
c-commands its Object NP the piano, while the PP in the living-room
Iunctioning as Adjunct oI Place is outside the c-command domain oI
the verb. But iI we consider the highest node Verb Phrase, which is
the maximal projection oI the V, then it appears that both the Object
NP and the Prepositional Adjunct are m-commanded by the verb
(given the Iirst node VP dominating all the constituents by its
maximal projection` status).

4.3. The Relation of Government and the Mechanism of Case
Assignment
This relation is crucial Ior understanding the hierarchy oI
relations in a sentence. It mainly explains the mechanism oI
morphological case assignment. More concretely, it accounts Ior the
assignment oI the Nominative case to the Subject NP and oI the
Accusative case to the Object NP(s).
Government relations hold between a head labelled as
governor (e.g. the Verb and the Preposition) and their governees
(NPs in the two examples below). By virtue oI the government
relation the governor assigns morphological to its governee, as
Iollows:
(62)
V
0
NP P
0
NP
Acc Acc
kissMary/her withMary/her

Thus the relation Government lies at the basis oI case
assignment. It explains how morphological case, which is not inherent
in Ns, is assigned to Subject and Object NPs.
Government holds between two terms that are to be Iound in
the maximal projection oI a head X - the XP (exempliIied below by
the VP and the PP below, as well as by the VP maximal projection in
the third (c) representation:




56
(63)
a. VP b. PP

V` P`

V
0
NP P
0
NP
meet people/them at the airport

c.
VP

V`
V` PP

V NP P`

P NP

meet people at the airport


In the Iirst two cases the governor is a head (V and P
respectively) which m-commands the governee (i.e. the Iirst maximal
projection dominates both the governor (the head) and its governee)
In the third representation we Iind that the verb governs the NP
people, but it does not govern the NP the airport. The latter is
governed by the preposition at`, both constituents being dominated by
the maximal projection oI P, namely PP, the Prepositional Phrase.
Such maximal projections Iunction as barriers to the relation oI
government between a governors like V and the NP the airport`. In
other words government oI the airport` by the V meet` is blocked by
the intervening occurrence oI the PP barrier. However, we can notice
that the conditions oI government are met in the sequence made up oI
the verb meet` and the whole PP at the airport`.
At this point we could state more generally that the relation oI
government between a constituent and a constituent holds iI the
Iollowing three conditions are met:
(64)
a. is X, i.e. head,
b. m-commands
57
c. no maximal projection intervenes between and

We have analysed so Iar three hypostases in which government
relations hold:
(65)
a) a V governor and its sister`complement - the NP to the
right (meet the people)
b) a P governor and its complement the NP governee to the
right oI the preposition (at the airport)
c) a V governor and the whole PP under the domination oI the
VP maximal projection (meet at the airport).
The direct consequence oI the government relation is case assignment.
Morphological case (in all the examples above the Accusative) is
assigned by the verbal or prepositional governors oI the respective
NPs. In all the instances above the direction oI government has been
Irom leIt to right. This is speciIic to case assignment under
government in a language like English.

4.4. More on Case Assignment: The Case Filter
Unlike Person, Number and Gender, Case is not an inherent
category oI Nouns. A caseless NP such as that book, mv lover a.s.o.
has to receive case Irom a governing element. Otherwise it cannot be
interpreted as Subject or Object in the hierarchy oI sentence
constituents. It may become visible` only iI it receives case Irom the
constituent which governs it. This requirement is labelled as The Case
Filter which applies to all overt NPs:
(66)
1he Case Filter: any overt AP must receive case.

So Iar we have only explained how the Accusative case is
assigned case by governors such as V and Preposition.II the Subject is
base-generated in the position oI SpeciIier oI VP (the VP internal
hypothesis) the respective conIiguration does not allow its receiving
morphological case, more precisely the Nominative. On the other
hand, this is not the typical/canonical/standard position oI English
S-Structure Subject.

58
4.5. Nominative Case Assignment to the S-Structure Subject
We have not explained, however, a very important
phenomenon: the assignment oI the Nominative case to the Subject
NP. This assignment can take place only iI the Subject NP is placed in
the position oI SpeciIier oI IP. As we will show the Subject is base-
generated under VP (in the position oI Spec, VP) where it cannot be
assigned case. Hence it has to move to the higher position oI Spec, IP
in order to receive case (the Nominative) Irom the governor I, the
head oI the IP. The hypothesis that the Nominative case is also
assigned under government seems to be contradicted by the direction
oI government which is always Irom leIt to right.
The explanation oI Nominative case assignment is based on a
structural requirement: the application oI case assignment upon a
Specifier-head conIiguration Irom right to leIt. This conIiguration
contains agreement as well. The InIlection has to be Iinite Ior
agreement and Nominative case assignment to apply. This conIirms
the Nominative marking oI Iinite clausal structures versus case
assignment in non-Iinite clauses.

4.6. Types of Case Assignment
To point out the diIIerence between the two types oI case
assignment let us consider the two structural segments in the IP
below:
(67) IP

Spec I`

NP I VP

Agr T V`

V NP
1ohn -s sponsor Mary/her
Nominative Accusative
59

5. 1he Link between the Lexicon and the Syntax: 1he Projection
Principle
The Iexicon is a global store oI the lexical items in the
language. It provides all the properties characterising each item/word
Irom a phonological, grammatical (morpho-syntactic) and semantic
point oI view. These properties, which are speciIied in the lexical
entry oI each item, are projected Irom the Iexicon to all the other
levels. Hence the name given to this universal principle: the
Projection Principle. It actually secures the link between the Iexicon
and the two levels oI the Syntax in the overall organization oI
grammar: D-Structure and S-Structure, The basic Ieatures oI all
lexical items are valid and visible at all these levels.
We shall demonstrate that this is oI particular interest Ior the major
topic oI the present study, which is Iocused on preaication. The
inIormation about verbs speciIies their argument structure made up oI
the thematic roles they assign to their arguments (e.g. Agent, Patient,
Instrument, Goal, etc.).
Iet us consider as illustration the verb send, which belongs to
the class/subcategory oI aative verbs. These verbs are specialized,
Irom a semantic point oI view, Ior expressing the change oI
possession oI an entity by its transIer to a Goal, as shown by the
sentence:
(68)
Mark sent the money to Pete.
Agent Patient Coal

The lexical entry Ior send speciIies three thematic roles Iorming the
theta grid / thematic structure oI the Verb send:
(69)
SEND Theta-grid: Agent, Patient, Goal

There are three participants involved in the conceptual structure oI
events like senaing smth. to smb.: an Agent which occupies the
Subject position, a Patient role, realized syntactically by the NP the
money, Iunctioning as Direct Object and the role oI Goal, realized
syntactically by the Prepositional Phrase to Pete, Iunctioning as
60
Indirect Object (marked by the directional dative preposition to).
Actually the whole predication expressed by the Verb Phrase (VP)
sent the money to Pete requires as Subject an NP with the role oI
Agent (at the same time Source) oI the transIer.
All this inIormation is projected Irom the Iexicon to
D-Structure and then to S-Structure, being preserved up to the end oI
the derivational process, so that the Iollowing alternative oI the basic
sentence, occurring at S-Structure aIter reordering oI constituents has
applied, has the same thematic structure as the one indicated as basic
in the Iexicon:
(70)
Mark sent Pete the money.

The two objects are reordered, but they still represent the same
correlations between their theta role and the Iunction they discharge:
the Indirect Object bears the role oI Goal, the Direct Object the role oI
Patient.
Our example above is based on the hypothesis that the two
dative alternatives are related derivationally by a movement rule
which reorders the two objects. The rule is known as Dative
Movement and it applies on the dative conIiguration with a
prepositional Indirect Object, deriving a quasi-synonymous alternative
sentence with a non-prepositional double object pattern. In the
literature there have been suggested other explanatory analyses as
well. But irrespective oI whether these theories support the relation
between the two constructions or not, one thing is undeniable: the
same thematic roles are projected Irom the Iexicon onto the two
S-Structure alternatives, which also share the basic semantic
interpretation oI most dative constructions: the change oI possession
by means oI a transIer Irom an Agent to a Goal.

5.1. More on Thematic (Theta-) Roles
Verbs denote events in which one or several participants take
place. The conceptual structure oI each verb reIlects this association oI
an event with one or several arguments that correspond to the number
oI the participants in the respective event. The roles oI the participants
61
are projected Ior each verb onto its argument structure. Thus
inIormation about the logical predication (mainly reIerring to the set
oI arguments that are marked Ior the roles) is integrated into syntax.
Thus, the Agent represents the initiator and perIormer oI an
activity, the actor` who controls the event, the Patient or Theme oI
the verb is the role played by the entity that undergoes the eIIect or
suIIers the impact oI an activity, the Goal is either the human
receiver` oI a transIerred entity or the point oI space towards which
an object or a person moves etc. These roles whose number is deIinite
and which are valid universally Iorm the role-structure associated
with the logical predicate (realized grammatically by a Verb or an
Adjective).
Each argument bearing a -role is grammaticalised as an NP
in a certain position as to the main verb. Role structures are part oI our
mental and linguistic Iexicon, they represent lexical conceptual
structures (ICS).(5) The roles are indicated in -grias Ior each V or
A. The roles correspond to/match the constituents that make up the
subcategorization Irame. II there is an Agent in the theta-grid oI a verb
it is placed in Subject position in an active sentence, the Patient
usually Iunctions as Direct Object, the Goal in a dative sentence is
Indirect Object etc. Here are several syntactic conIigurations involving
the roles oI Agent and Patient/Theme, respectively:
(71)
a. Agent ( single role in the event expressed by the verb) as
Subject
The girl is smiling. Those dogs are barking.
Ag Ag
b. Agent and Patient as Subject and Object (respectively)
The girl sliced the breaa. Marian trained her aog.
Ag Pat Ag Pat
c. Patient (single role in the event) as Subject
The pencil dropped. The leaves are trembling.
Pat Pat
The examples above show that the roles are mapped on
syntactic structure in a precise way. Thus the Agent never Iunctions as
Direct Object, while the Patient role that denotes an aIIected entity
seems to be specialized Ior the latter Iunction. Depending upon the
62
semantics oI the verb, the Patient can also Iunction as Subject (iI the
theta-grid lacks an Agent). Such associations between roles and
syntactic positions in the subcategorial Irame oI verbs are the key to
the description oI predication types.

5.2. Thematic Roles Universally Assigned by Verbs
Here is an inventory oI the theta roles that verbs can assign to
their arguments in any natural language:
(72)
Agent the animate initiator, perIormer and controller` oI an
action: work, laugh, eat smth., buila smth. etc.

Patient/ Theme - the aIIected entity, be it a person or a thing
undergoing the eIIect/impact oI some action: aie, fall, the
object which is eaten, written etc.

Experiencer the participant experiencing a psychological
state or process (cognitive, aIIective etc.).: love, aislike, think,
remember etc.

Goal the location or entity in the direction oI which
something moves: (go )to Lonaon, ( give smth.) to smb.

Benefactive/ Beneficiary the entity that beneIits Irom the
action or event denoted by the predicate: (buy a giIt) for smb.,
(cook a dish) for smb.

Source the location or entity Irom which something
moves: (come) from the north

Instrument the medium by which the action or event is
carried out: (mix the sauce) with a spoon

Locative / Location the speciIication oI the place where
t he action / event takes place.

Role structures are part oI our mental linguistic Iexicon, they
represent lexical conceptual structures (ICS). The roles are indicated
in -grids Ior each oI the lexical items that predicate Ss: Vs or As. The
63
roles correspond to/match the constituents that make up the
subcategori:ation frame, e.g. the verb listen (to someone) It takes two
arguments: an Experiencer and a Patient which correspond to the
Subfect NP and, respectively, to the Prepositional Phrase in
Complement position, as in:
(73)
Sean is listening to the sonata.
NP_ ] V _PP]------------ subcategorization frame
Subject Prep Object -----syntactic functions
Exp Pat------------- thematic roles

The role-structure is associated with the argument structure oI the
logical predication (realized grammatically by a Verb or an
Adjective). Each argument bearing a -role is grammaticalised as an
NP in a certain position as to the main verb. There is a one-to-one
relation between theta-roles and arguments. One and the same role
cannot be assigned to two diIIerent arguments, e.g.
(74)
*1he cook is preparing the salad the meal.
Ag Pat 1 Pat 2
Neither is it possible Ior the verb to assign two roles to the same
argument, e.g.
(75)
* Sean aamirea.
Exp, Pat
The only conIiguration that might render such a thematic role
combination is:
(76)
Sean aamires himself. (The Direct Object is reIlexive, i.e.
Exp Pat coreIerent with the Subject)

5.3. The Theta -criterion
We have demonstrated above that there should be a one-to-
one relation between thematic roles and arguments.. This is captured
by the so-called theta-criterion, according to which:

64
(77)
a. Each argument must be associatea with one ana onlv one
theta-role.
b. Each theta-role must be associatea with one ana onlv one
argument.

At this point we conclude that there are two important principles in
Universal Grammar that secure the adequate prediction oI the
argument structure and the corresponding roles associated with it: the
Projection Principle and the Theta Criterion. In the lexical entry Ior
each verb or predicating Adjective there is a speciIication oI the set oI
participants in the event and oI the theta-roles they are assigned. By
virtue oI the two principles mentioned above this inIormation is
projected onto Syntax, at all levels oI structure.

5.4. Types of Arguments: Inherent versus Non-inherent, External
versus Internal Arguments
The verb Iunctioning as predicate exclusively assigns inherent
theta-roles to its arguments, e.g. Agent, Patient, Experiencer. These
are realized syntactically as the compulsory/ obligatory constituents oI
the whole predication underlying the sentence. Arguments like
Iocation are non-inherent; they are realized by Adverbials. Theta-role
assignment occurs at D-Structure level, starting with the local core`
oI the VP its minimal domain , where the internal argument (in
Complement position) receives its role Irom the verb head. The
internal argument is closest to the V, hence in most cases it
corresponds to the Patient/Theme role:
(78) VP

Spec V`

V NP (Compl. Position)

slice bread (Patient- inherent,
internal argument)
65

This is, thereIore, the Iirst stage in the process oI theta-role
assignment. The second stage consists in the assignment oI the theta
role (here the Agent) to the Subject. Thus the Subject receives its role
Irom the whole V` (made up oI V and its Complement, which has
already been assigned its role, the internal argument). Hence it
represents an external argument, the last one to get its role Irom the
smaller V`. Since theta-role assignment has to take place locally, it is
convenient to generate the Subject within the domain oI VP, in
SpeciIier position (the one leIt empty in the representation above
(48). This is part oI the VP-internal hypothesis, according to which
Subjects are base-generated inside the VP, in the position oI SpeciIier
oI VP. From this position, in which it occurs as an external argument
to V`, it will have to move to the higher SpeciIier position under the
node IP. This movement is obligatory in English, whose grammar
disallows null subjects at sentence level. All sentences in English must
have an overt Subject in SpeciIier oI IP position at S-structure level.
Summing up the two stages reIerred to above, we shall
represent the VP again, this time Iilling the Spec oI VP position with
an external argument, the Agent cooks:
(79) VP

Spec V`

NP V NP (Compl. Position)

Cooks slice bread
(Agent) (Patient)

External Internal
Argument Argument

It has been noticed that there exists a certain asymmetry
between the external and the internal arguments oI the verb. The
Subject has to move to the higher SpeciIier position, while the Direct
Object remains inside the VP domain. The Subject is obligatory Ior all
predicates, while the Direct Object only occurs with transitive verbs.
66
There are even possible cases oI Direct Object deletion. The DO is
null in S-Structures like:
(80)
a. Sheila is smoking.
b. Noam is reaaing.

Besides, the selection oI diIIerent DOs determines a change in the
assignment oI the external role to the Subject:
(81)
a. The tourist ate onlv local aishes. (Agent)
b. The voungster has eaten his heart out. (Experiencer)
c. The seas sprav has eaten the paint.(Cause)

We notice that the degree oI semantic Iusion` between the V and its
DO is by Iar greater than that between the Vand its Subject. This is
also proved by the existence oI numerous idiomatic phrases patterned
as V- DO (e.g. example (51)-b, to which one might add, as illustration,
more idioms based on the same verb: to eat humble pie, to eat ones
woras, to eat ones hat a.s.o.).

5.5. Subtypes of Internal Arguments
In their turn internal arguments which are part oI the
subcategorization Irame oI the verb, can be subdivided into two
subtypes:
a) direct internal arguments, which grammaticalize/ Iunction as Direct
Objects oI transitive verbs, are assigned their theta-role Irom the
respective verb (exclusively); they also receive case (usually the
Accusative) by the same verb under government (verb-internally)
b) indirect internal arguments, which Iunction as Prepositional Objects
receive their theta-role Irom the verb indirectly, as this assignment is
mediated` by the preposition selected by each verb oI the type
complex or phrasal:
(82)
a. Marian lookea after her nephews.
b. I glancea at my watch.
c. We were heaaing for the city.
67
While the theta-role is assigned by the joint contribution oI the verb
and its preposition, morphological case is assigned by the preposition
alone, which is governor oI the NP inside the Prepositional Phrase.
The case commonly assigned by the governing preposition to its
governee is the Accusative:
(83)
a. I was waiting for Kate/her.
b. Jim argued with his partner/him.

5.6. Two Levels of Occurrence of Prepositional Phrases
Prepositional Phrases are not always sisters to a prepositional
verb. They may occur as optional Adjuncts, being adjoined to V`.
Their Iunction is either: a) Iree` Prepositional Object or b) Adverbial
ModiIier. Consider:
(84)
a. He travelled with his aunt.
b. The old man was walking with a stick.

The prepositional phrases are not selected by the verbs used as
predicates. They occur as Adjuncts (oI the type Iree`/ optional
Prepositional Object) indicating in (84)-a association with a person in
perIorming an activity and in (84)-b an instrument used in carrying out
an activity. Hence they are sisters oI the higher V`. This position
becomes more obvious in the case oI a verb which is Iollowed by two
PPs, the Iirst Iunctioning as obligatory object, the second as optional
adjunct:
(85)
I looked at 1im with a smile.

The representation shows the diIIerent status oI the two PPs:

68
(86) VP


Spec V`

V` PP

V PP
look at 1im with a smile

Adverbial ModiIiers are very oIten expressed by PPs. Again
these Adjuncts are not sisters to V head. The latter do not
subcategorize Ior them (with a Iew exceptions that we shall comment
in Chapter 4). Here are some examples oI intransitive and transitive
predicates that occur in conIigurations with prepositional adjuncts
Iunctioning as Adverbial ModiIiers:
(87)
a. They gathered in the college librarv. (Adverbial oI Place)
b. They read the bibliography in the college librarv. (idem)
c. I handled the device with great care. (Adverbial oI Manner)
d. We leIt the town at dawn. (Adverbial oI Time)

The representation oI the constituent structure oI the VPs above is
perIectly similar to the one in (86).

6. Back to the Lexicon. Summing up 1ypes of Information in the
Lexical Entry of Jerbs
BeIore embarking on the description oI the major predication
types in English, realized by various verb subcategories we would like
to supply a systematic presentation oI the type oI inIormation an ideal
Iexicon should include in the lexical entry.
The lexical entry is as inIormative as possible with regard to
the properties oI lexical items at each level oI analysis and
representation. Thus the entry Ior each item in the Iexicon includes:
a) The representation oI the phonological form/matrix,
69
b) The categorial appurtenance oI the item, consisting in the
speciIication oI the Ieature indicating the lexical or syntactic
category it belongs to. Predicates are mainly realized by lexical Vs
or by the joint contribution oI light` Vs and Adjectives or Nouns.
For each item participating in the predication the lexical entry will
have to speciIy its categorial appurtenance, such as, Ior instance:
| V |, | A |, | N|.
c) Inherent/ basic semantic features which are relevant Irom a
grammatical point oI view; thus Verbs can be |/- state|, | / -
controlled activity|, | change-oI-state/inchoative|, | causative|
etc.
d) The thematic roles assigned by the V item are indicated by its
argument structure. This is speciIied as the theta-grid oI the
respective verb, which lists the theta-roles assigned to the external
argument - the Agent (Ag), as well as the thematic roles assigned
to the internal arguments, such as Patient (Pat) or Theme,
Experiencer (Exp), Instrument (Ins), Source (S), Goal (G),
BeneIactive (Ben) etc.
e) The subcategorv/subclass the V item belongs to, viewed Irom
a syntactic perspective, i.e. Irom the point oI view oI the syntactic
context each V occurs in. Thus the syntactic behavior oI each verb
is described by means oI the subcategori:ation frame, speciIying
the complements selected by the item, its sisters` or obligatory
terms/neighbors to the right. Thus Verbs subcategorize according
to their possible co-occurrence with a NP Iunctioning as Direct
Object, as indicated by the Irame: | _ NP|. The V items sharing
this Ieature are considered to be transitive, the ones that do not
enter the respective Irame are all intransitive verbs.

All the inIormation supplied in the lexical entry is projected to
D-Structure and to S-Structure, which is interpreted by the PF and IF
Components. Iexical items do not behave uniIormly, that is why the
idiosyncratic properties oI each item have to be speciIied. There are
verb items that have the same argument structure, but the positions
occupied by each theta-marked argument in S-Structure are
completely diIIerent. Compare, Ior instance the relational verbs of
possession to have and to belong. Their theta-grid includes the roles
70
Benefactive (the role oI the Possessor) and Patient (the role oI the
thing possessed). However, the Iollowing examples demonstrate that
they enter diIIerent syntactic conIigurations:
(88)
a. Mv sister has the yellow 1oyota.
b. 1he yellow 1oyota belongs to mv sister.

The predicate realized by the transitive verb have selects the
BeneIactive as surIace Subject and the Theme as Direct Object, while
the intransitive belong to preserves the BeneIactive in its D-Structure
position, where it is properly assigned the case dative by its governor,
the dative preposition to. The Theme moves to S-structure Subject
position. Such pairs oI verbs that share the thematic structure (theta-
roles) but occur in surIace with reverted positions Ior the respective
arguments are called converses. Among them there are enjoy and
please (their theta-grid includes the roles Experiencer and Theme),
sell and buy, borrow and lend a.s.o.
Another type oI irregularity springs Irom the Irequent absence
oI a one-to-one correspondence between the phonological matrix and
its semantic correlate. Thus the Iexicon includes and signals
numerous cases oI homonvmv and polvsemv. Thus there are three
distinct verbal items that sound the same:
(89)
become 1: intransitive copula-like verb meaning to
come to be, e.g. It became clear that the liberals woula win
the elections, Mv nephew became a pilot.
become 2: intransitive prepositional verb with an
eventive meaning in the semantic class oI to happen to
smb./smth, e.g. I wonaer what has become of the former moral
values of peasantrv.
become 3: transitive verb in the semantic class oI
to fit, suit, match, e.g. This hairstvle becomes vou.
We notice that each oI the three semantic readings is
associated with diIIerent argument positions. Hence, they
belong to three distinct subcategories: the Iirst one is an
intransitive copula-like verb, patterning like the prototypical
copula BE, the second is an intransitive verb with a Iixed
71
preposition (oI) which takes an obligatory Prepositional
Object, while the third is a transitive verb which takes a Direct
Object (the subcategory labelled as monotransitive) which,
like other items in the semantic class oI relational verbs (e.g.
to have), never allows passivization.
The lexical entry Ior each oI the homonymous items above
looks diIIerent, as Iar as the subcategorization Irame is
concerned. Thus, the Irames indicate the Iollowing
complement contexts:
(90)
a. BECOME 1 | __ AP/NP|
b. BECOME 2 | _ PP|
c. BECOME 3 | _ NP|

This analysis demonstrates that the behavior oI items is highly
idiosyncratic and the Iexicon has to include inIormation about the
oddities in the syntactic regime and its correlation with the specialized
lexical content(s) oI each item.

6.1. Selectional Features: C-selection and S-selection
The Irame Ior Verbs indicates the syntactic categorv (c) that is
selected by the respective V item as right-hand complement (sister`
constituent). Subcategorial contextual Ieatures Ior Vs can be speciIied
by the Iollowing Irames:
(i) __ # ] Ior intransitives like bark, chirp, sleep etc.;
(ii) __ PP| Ior intransitives with obligatory Prepositional
Object like look after, consist in, team with, relv on etc.;
(iii) __ NP] Ior transitives with one Direct Object
(monotransitives) like reaa, make, break, cut, hit etc.;
(iv) __ NP,PP] Ior transitives with a DO and a PO like
blame smb. for smth., remina smb. of smth. etc..
Thus the verb subcategorizes Ior a certain type oI categorial
context. The Irame only speciIies the syntactic categories it allows as
sisters`. The Subject NP is selected by the whole VP (the Predicate
Phrase). The Irames only speciIy the obligatorv complements, they
never include optional adjuncts (like Adverbial ModiIiers).
72
Thus c-selection is constrained as to the type oI category that can co-
occur with the verb. There are transitive verbs that exclusively select
NPs as sisters:
(91)
a.George hit the rea ball. *George hit that he woula succeea.
b.The artist carved the statue. *The artist carved whether he
woula win the pri:e.
c.The engineer manufactured the moael. *The engineer
manufactured for the builaing to stana.

We notice that the respective monotransitive verbs can only
be Iollowed by NPs, i.e. non-clausal constituents. The various types oI
complement clauses (Iinite like ,that`-clauses or indirect questions
introduced by whether or non-Iinite like the ,Ior`-to InIinitive
complement) are disallowed in the position oI Complement oI
transitives.
The same can be proved with reIerence to some oI the prepositional
intransitives. Thus the verbs consist in/of, abouna in, swarm with, look
for etc. only select NPs which are governed by the respective
preposition, together with which they Iorm Prepositional Objects:
(92)
a. The treatise consists of five chapters. * (of) that it will be
stuaiea.
b. The pond abounds in trout. *whether thev will be caught.

Each oI the above-mentioned subcategories, however,
includes groups oI verbs that share the c-selection Ieature Ior clausal
complements. Thus verbs like assert, affirm ascertain, aeclare, state,
etc.can select either an NP or a CP (clause). For the choice oI the
latter, however, each verb has its own restrictions as to the clause type
that can go with the verb:
(93)
a. The embassy ascertained the truth of the report.
b. The speaker ascertained that the rumor was false.
c.* The speaker ascertained to change his attituae.
d.* The speaker ascertained changing his attituae.

73
Some prepositional intransitives can also select CPs in alternation
with non-clausal NPs:
(94)
a. The liberal insisted on the reform.
b. The liberal insisted on applving the reform.
c. The liberal insisted that the reform shoula be appliea.
d.*The liberal insisted to applv the reform.

The verb insist has a richer range oI selection than ascertain,
as it can select Gerundial complements as well.
Another kind oI selectional requirement, labelled as s-
selection regards the semantic compatibilitv oI the verb with the
lexical /semantic Ieatures oI the argument it selects. In other words, it
is not enough to state that a certain transitive verbs selects the NP
category, because not any NP can occur as complement oI the
respective verb. There are some semantic restrictions imposed by each
verb to its sister constituent. Transitive predicates, Ior instance, diIIer
in point oI the semantic Ieatures oI the NPs they take as Direct
Objects. Consider:
(95)
a. Bob is eating a pizza/ his nails/ his chair/ his freedom;
b. Sheila marriea Ceorge / a great pianist/ the pavement.

Violation oI selectional restriction results in ungrammatical
strings. However, in idiomatic or metaphorical phrases selectional
restrictions can be violated (e.g. eat ones woras).

6.2. Cross-categorial Classifications
Despite their idiosyncrasies, lexical items can be grouped into
smaller subclasses according to the speciIic semantic and syntactic
properties they share. This division into subclasses or subcategories is,
thereIore, determined by one or several common properties/Ieatures oI
a semantic or syntactic nature, Ieatures that can be inherent or
contextual. Cross-categorial classiIications result iI two distinct lexical
categories minimally share one Ieature or pair oI Ieatures in
opposition.
74
This is the case oI Verb and Adjectives, the main predicators
in English. The prototype oI predicator is the lexical verb, but iI the
verb is light, as in the case oI copulative predicates whose verbal
constituent is the meaningless verb BE, the lexical tasks oI predication
are realized most Irequently by Adjectival Phrases headed by
predicative As. The two categories Vs and predicative As share the
semantic opposition |/- state|, hence both Vs and As can be
subdivided into |state| or |-state| subclasses. The distinction between
stative Vs and As, on the one hand, and activitv ones is highly relevant
morphologically and syntactically. Thus it is only activitv Js ana As
that can occur in the Progressive Aspect:
(96)
a. Bill is playing at hide-and-seek.
b. Bill is being cheeky.

State Vs and As produce in this case ungrammatical strings like:
(97)
a. Bill is knowing the rule.
b. Bill is being tall.

Among the tests that are resorted to when we want to
distinguish between state preaications and activitv ones, mention
should be made oI the possible Iormation oI Imperative sentences iI
the V or A is |-state| versus the blocking oI such conIigurations
expressing orders, directives a.s.o. iI the predication is |state|.
Compare the Iirst two sentences which are predicated by |-state| V
and A items to the last two that prove to be ungrammatical, owing to
the |state| Ieature shared by their predicates:
(98)
a. Learn this poem by heart!
b. Be more tolerant!
c. * Know the poem by heart!
d. * Be tall!

Other similarities that might result in cross-categorial
groupings regard the syntactic combinatorial possibilities. Both Vs
75
and As subcategorize as to Complementation by non-clausal or clausal
syntactic categories (according to c-selection). Compare:
(99)
a. Iilian fears bulldogs.
b. Iilian is afraia of bulldogs.
c. Iilian reali:es her guilt.
d. Iilian is aware of her guilt.

The number and kind oI arguments oI each V-A pair is the
same. The theta-grid oI the Verbs fear and reali:e, on the one hand,
and oI the Adjectives afraia and aware on the other hand, is identical.
It includes the roles Experiencer and Theme. Syntactically, however,
fear and reali:e take a direct internal argument (they are
monotransitive verbs with a Direct Obfect NP in Complement
position), while afraia and aware select an indirect internal argument,
a Prepositional Phrase Iunctioning as (Oblique) Prepositional Obfect.
Prepositional Adjectives are similar to phrasal verbs (with
obligatory preposition).The theta-role oI the PP is assigned by the
verb or the adjective, respectively, while morphological case is
assigned by the preposition in both cases.
The cross-categorial classiIication oI predicating Vs and As
may be sustained as well by the Iact that they both subcategorize as to
complement clauses distributed in Subject (extraposed clauses) or
Object positions. The latter evince the same diIIerence (Direct Object
with Vs versus Prepositional Object with As) as the one maniIested
with non-clausal complements. Consider:
(100)
a. It seems |that the government will refect the profect|
b. It is certain |that the government will refect the profect|.
c. We realize |that the government will refect the profect|.
d. We are aware |that the government will refect the
profect|.

Verbs like seem, appear, happen etc. have the same
c-selectional Ieatures as adjectives like certain, sure, likelv etc. They
select CPs that occur in Iinal position in the Complex Sentence,
Iunctioning as (extraposed) Subject Clauses, anticipated by the
Iormal` IT surIace subject. They can equally occur in constructions
based on Subject to Subject Raising (SSR) as proved by the examples
below:
76
(101)
a. The government seems [ to refect the profect|.
b. The government is certain [to refect the profect|.

In both constructions the deep Subject oI the InIinitive Complement is
raised in the position oI S-Structure Subject oI the Main Clause. Both
constructions belong to the traditionally labelled Nominative with the
InIinitive construction.
The complex sentence conIigurations in (100)-c and d Iurther
prove that some preaicative aafectives (belonging to the
prepositional` subcategory) select indirect internal arguments oI the
clausal type, which makes them Iunctionally similar, but not identical
with complementation properties oI synonymous verbs. Thus, the
transitive verb oI cognition to realize selects a CP Iunctioning as
Direct Object Clause; the synonymous copular predicate be/become
aware (of) apparently shares the same selection oI a Iinite that`-
clause. The diIIerence lies in the Iact that the preposition oI the
adjective aware becomes null phonetically in the context oI that`-
clauses.
In point oI s-selection the restrictions imposed by the verbal
items above coincide with those required by the analogous adjectives.
The psychological` predicates that Iorm a cross-categorial class oI
Verbs and Adjectives select a |human| NP Ior the role Experiencer
and a |abstract| NP Ior the role Theme/Patient.
There are as well other distinct categories that can be said to
Iorm classes oI similar items Irom a semantic and Iunctional point oI
view. Thus Prepositional Phrases and Adverbial Phrases share the
cross-categorial semantic and distributional property oI Iunctioning as
Adverbial ModiIiers. Compare:
(102)
a. The students were listening with great attention.
(Prepositional Phrase - Adverbial Modifier of Manner)
b. The students were listening verv attentivelv. (Adverbial
Phrase - Adverbial Modifier of Manner)

The syntactic criterion oI distribution/position and Iunction
(here with reIerence to optional Adverbial Adjuncts), coupled with
that oI lexical content, seems to result in such cross-categorial
classiIications as the ones commented on above.

77
6.3. Other Semantic Cross-classifications
Predicates with the same lexical content, or with a quasi-
similar one, may be grouped according to the logico-semantic
criterion, irrespective oI the distinct syntactic properties they evince.
Thus reciprocal verbs ana aafectives denoting mutual inter-relations
between entities Iorm a quasi-uniIorm semantic class. Compare:
(103)
a. Romanian is similar to Portuguese.
b. Romanian resembles Portuguese

In the example above the copulative predicate be similar is
synonymous to the monotransitive reciprocal verb resemble.
Syntactically, however the predicative adjective similar selects a
Prepositional Object obligatorily marked by the preposition to, while
the verb resemble selects a Direct Object. Iet us take one more pair:
(104)
a. Romanian is aifferent Irom German.
b. Romanian aiffers from German.

Here the synonymous reciprocal verbs and adjectives have an almost
identical syntactic behavior. They both select an indirect internal
argument the Prepositional Phrase governed by the same
preposition: from, which assigns Accusative case to its object.
Reciprocal verbs and adjectives share an important syntactic
Ieature: they are symmetric predicates, allowing reversibility oI their
arguments (the Subject and the Direct or Prepositional Object):
(105)
a. Maggy is married to Sean. Sean is married to Maggie.
b. Maggy married Sean. Sean married Maggie.

This syntactic property oI reciprocal predicates explains why
passivization does not apply to such conIigurations. The mechanism
oI passivization mainly produces synonymous conIigurations with re-
verted Subjects and Objects. This reordering applies Ireely in the case
oI symmetric predicates.

78

6.5. Subcategories with a Two-fold Regime and the Floating
Phenomenon
In present-day English one can identiIy verbs that enjoy a
two-Iold regime. Items like break, begin, continue, change, arop,
start, turn, stop etc. enter two distinct types oI predication:
(i) a two-argument conIiguration, speciIic to transitives that
assign the role Agent to their Subject and Patient to their Direct
Object. The Subject can also be assigned the role Cause(er),
expressing an inanimate entity or phenomenon that aIIects the Patient.
(ii) a one-argument conIiguration, speciIic to intransitives
that only assign the Patient/Theme role (verbs labelled as
unacusatives)
Consider the two sentences below predicated by the same verb
break, used transitively and intransitively:
(106)
a. The thief broke the French winaow (the Agent is Subject,
the Theme is Direct Object)
b. The French winaow broke. ( the Theme moves to Subject in
order to receive case, the Agent is absent)

The Iirst pattern implies causation oI the event, the second
simply reIers to the resulting state. So verbs like break can actually
express two event types. One and the same verb enters two patterns
that diIIer in point oI preaication (subcategory) and global semantic
interpretation. The verb can predicate a maximal` structure with a
causative meaning (the transitive use) or a minimal one, consisting oI
the role Patient in surIace Subject position and an intransitive verb.
These verbs Iorm a subcategory apart called ergative, by
analogy with the case marking strategies in ergative languages, which
instead oI the nominative-accusative system, have an ergative-
absolutive one. Ergative verbs seem to have a balanced behavior
combining in equal shares transitivity and intransitivity
(unaccusativity).
Actually, iI we introduce diachronic analysis, we come to the
conclusion that the two-Iold regime oI these ergatives was the Iinal
79
result oI a gradual process oI recategorization (Irom transitive to
intransitive). In its turn this process reIlects the Iloating nature` oI
(in)transitivity which continues to be maniIested today. The present
book will dedicate special sections to the respective phenomenon. We
shall limit ourselves here to one example, namely the Iormation oI
middle` verbs. Consider the sentences:
(107)
a. The magazine sold quickly.
b. Dust brushes easily.
c. Silk dresses iron smoothly.

The predicate is expressed by a basically transitive verb: the
D-Structure description oI the respective verb places the NPs that
appear as surIace Subjects in governee` position, Iunctioning as
Direct Objects. In the absence oI an Agent these Patient-marked NPs
move to Subject. However, this is not a productive pattern with the
respective verb. This use resembles the Passive by the movement oI
the Patient to surIace Subject (hence the labels halI-passive`,
passival`, activo-passive`). But the use is limited to contexts
whereIrom the Agent is obligatorily missing. Besides the
conIiguration has to include as Adjunct a Manner Adverbial.
The present study is organized according to the semantic and
syntactic criteria that determine verb subcategorization in English.
Each section Iocuses on one major type oI predication, supplying a
detailed description oI the subcategories which realize it in English
grammar and usage.
80


II. SIMPLE INTRANSITIVE PREDICATIONS



1. Syntactically Simple versus Syntactically Complex Intransitives
We have already pointed out that transitivity and intransitivity are
properties determined by the presence or absence oI a Direct Object in the
Irame oI the verb. The Noun Phrase discharging this Iunction is the
obligatory sister` oI the transitive verb, being placed in Complement
position. With intransitives there is no such sister`. The V - NP
government relation is altogether ruled out. Nevertheless, intransitive
predications evince various degrees oI semantic and/or syntactic
complexity. Thus iI the verb only requires the Subject to Iorm a
grammatical sentence it is considered to be svntacticallv simple. These
verbs take a single argument which is assigned one role, Agent (1)-a or
Patient (1)-b:
(1)
a. All the spectators are laughing.
b. Accidents will happen.

The theta-role assigned by each oI the verbs that predicate the sentences
above are, thereIore: a) Agent (Ag) Ior the Subject oI laugh and b) Patient
(Pat)/ Theme (T) Ior the Subject oI happen. These are cases oI what
traditional grammarians used to consider as Jerbs of complete preaication,
intuiting correctly that the respective verbal predicators are selI-suIIicient.
Although these verbs do not take Direct Objects they may be modiIied by
Adjuncts, i.e. optional Adverbial ModiIiers realized by Adverb Phrases or
Prepositional Phrases, as shown by the Iollowing sentences predicated by
syntactically simple intransitives, be they activity verbs or verbs denoting
state or change oI state, e.g.:
(2)
a. The baby was crying bitterlv. (Manner Adverbial)
b. Iilacs blossom in spring. (Time Adverbial)
c. The old king died in his bea. (Place Adverbial)

The Adjunct may also be a Iree (optional) Prepositional Object or a
Predicative Adjunct reduced Irom a Small Clause, e.g.;

81
(3)
a. He was walking with a stick. (Ag Subject, activity verb,
Instrumental PO)
b. She died voung. (Pat Subject, resulting state verb, Predicative
Adjunct/Complement to the Subject)

2. Split Intransitivity: Unergatives and Unaccusatives
The property oI intransitivity appears to be split into two, which
determines the subcategorization oI intransitives into two, namely:
(i) unergatives, i.e. verbs which assign the theta-role oI
Agent to their single argument. They denote activities or
agentive acts which are, in general volitional, being
controlled by their perIormer or initiator. There are,
however, verbs that denote uncontrolled activities, this
distinction being proved by the examples below:
(4)
a. The two miners were toiling hard. (controlled activity)
b. The boy snee:ea all oI a sudden. (uncontrolled act)

The negatively preIixed label oI this subcategory indicates that the
respective verbs behave unlike ergatives, which can occur either as
intransitives or as transitives with Patient Subject or Patient Direct Object.
The class oI ergatives will be dealt with in greater detail in the section
devoted to transitive verb subcategories. Here are, Ior the moment, two
such pairs` oI conIigurations (a)-b and (c)-d predicated by the same verb
used in two ways, intransitively and transitively:
(5)
a. The pencil aroppea.(intransitive, Pat Subject)
b. Tom aroppea the pencil. (transitive and causative, Pat Direct
Object)
c. The lesson began. (intransitive, Pat Subject)
d. The teacher began the lesson. (transitive, causative, Ag Subject)

Unergatives diIIer greatly Irom such verbs, in that they always
occur in one conIiguration (an intransitive one) with an agentive Subject.

(ii) unaccusatives, i.e. verbs which assign the theta-role oI
Patient or Theme to their single argument. They denote non-
agentive states or changes oI state. The typical Iunction oI this
argument is that oI Direct Object. However, these verbs cannot
82
assign the accusative case to the Patient-marked argument,
because they lack a nominative Agent-marked Subject, e.g.:
(6)
a. An unpleasant incident occurrea yesterday.
b. A huge shape appearea on the horizon.

The subject taken by unaccusative verbs like occur and appear is a
Patient, which instead oI occupying the Direct Object position moves to the
Subject pre-verb one. A Irequent alternative Ior such sentences is the
there` construction, as in:
(7)
a. There occurrea an unpleasant incident yesterday.
b. There appearea a huge shape on the horizon.

These conIigurations actually contain two Subjects: a
deep`/logical one occurring in post-verb position and a
surIace`/grammatical one realized by the dummy expletive item there`.

2.1. The Representation of Unergatives and Unaccusatives
At the level oI D-Structure the representation oI each oI the two
subcategories reveals the essential diIIerence between them, despite the Iact
that they are both one-argument verbs. Here is the D-Structure oI
unergatives according to the hypothesis that the Subject is base-generated
under the VP node:
(8)
VP

Spec V`

NP V
Bob cried

Unergatives select an external argument which is theta-marked as
Agent.They totally lack an internal argument like Patient.
Unaccusatives have the Iollowing D-Structure representation:
(9) VP
Spec V`

V NP
happened the accident
83

The verb cannot assign the accusative case to the NP the accident`.
Consequently the NP moves to Spec to Iurther become Subject and receive
nominative case. The impossibility oI assigning the accusative case is
explained by Burzio (1986) by the absence oI the external argument (Ag)
Irom the argument structure oI some verbs. This correlation (absence oI an
external argument impossibility oI assigning the accusative) is captured
by Burzio`s generalization`. The direct consequence oI this generalization
is the Iact that the Patient-marked argument has to move to the only
position available, the Spec one occupied by the Subject. Another reason
why this movement has to take place in English is the compulsory presence
oI the Subject in S-Structure (the SpeciIier IP position cannot remain
empty/unoccupied).

2.2. Semantic Subclassification of Unergatives
Agentive intransitives / unergatives include several subcategories
which share a set oI semantic properties. Thus we can distinguish:
(i) verbs expressing deliberate human activities,
usually based on certain skills, e.g. aance, wal:,;
fog, skate, ski, swim, struggle, wrestle, work, toil
etc.
(ii) motion verbs: flv, walk etc.
(iii) verbs expressing human physical gestures or
reactions, most oI which are involuntary
e.g. belch, chuckle, crv, giggle, grin, hiccup,
kneel, laugh, sleep, smile, vomit, weep, grin,
frown, a.s.o.
(iv) deliberate cognitive activities, e.g. aavaream,
meaitate, muse, prav a.s.o.
(v) reciprocal inter-human reactions, be they
harmonious or disharmonious, e.g. agree,
aisagree, quarrel a.s.o.
(vi) verbs expressing linguistic activities, e.g. grumble,
mumble, mutter, speak, shout, talk, whisper etc.
(vii) verbs expressing non-deliberate physical reactions
or processes: belch, crv, sleep, weep, cough,
snee:e, vomit a.s.o.

84
(viii) verbs expressing involuntary sounds or noises
produced by animals, e.g. bark, chirp,
miaow/meow, neigh, oink or grunt, quack etc.

2.3. Syntactic Properties of Unergatives
We should also point out that the unergative behavior oI some oI
the above-mentioned verbal items actually represents their basic and
minimal patterning regime. Some oI them may also occur in more extended
Irames which include Iixed/compulsory prepositions that govern NPs. II
the prepositional Ieature oI the respective verbs is the aative to, as is the
case oI verbs oI linguistic activities (speak to smb., talk to smb. etc.) or
verbs indicating human gestures/ motions (bow to smb., kneel to smb. etc.)
the Prepositional Phrase thus Iormed Iunctions as Indirect Object (IO), as
in the Iollowing contexts:
(10)
a. Jack was talking to the Dean. (linguistic activity, IO)
b. The young actress bowea to the audience. (gesture, IO)

II the Preposition is other than the dative to, the Iunction oI the
Prepositional Phrase is Prepositional Object, as in:
(11)
a. Brian has quarrelea with his next-door neighbor. (reciprocal
act, PO)
b. The members oI the committee have agreea on the issue.
(reciprocal act, PO)

Some oI the unergatives may take two such Objects, as is the case oI the
complex structures in which the Iirst one is an IO or reciprocal PO and the
second one is a PO expressing the topic/issue the activity is Iocused on:
(12)
a. I have talkea to the boss about my latest complaint.
(linguistic activity, IO and topic`PO)
b. He appliea to the board for the secretarial job. (human
activity, IO Iollowed by PO indicating a Goal)
c. John has agreea with his wife on the summer plans.
(reciprocal act, reciprocal PO, topic` PO)

The most complex structures are the ones including two POs, the
second oI which is heavy`, i.e. it is modiIied by other phrases, possibly a
Preposional one, as in:
85
(13)
a. I have agreea with Mother (PO1) on blue for the kitchen
(PO2).
b. The student talkea to his colleagues (IO) about the summer
exams in physics and chemistry (heavy`PO).

All the verbs that can take such prepositional completions should be kept
distinct Irom verbs such as abouna (in), consist (of), wonaer (about) which
never occur by themselves. They are considered to be phrasal verbs which
take meaningless obligatory prepositions (governors oI Ps) as proved by:
(14)
a. * The treatise consistea. vs. The treatise consistea of 5 sections.
b. * I wonaerea. vs. I wonaerea about that alternative.

2.4. Further Semantic and Syntactic Properties of Unergatives
Unergative verbs denote atelic events which render aurative
situations. Hence the respective verbs can be modiIied by aaverbials that
indicate duration like Ior` and since` temporal prepositional phrases, e.g.:
(15)
a. Michael has been working hard since he was a teen-ager /
for over 10 years.
b. Those kittens have been meowing with hunger since dawn /
for half an hour.
c. The little boy has been coughing since he caught that bad
flue / for several minutes.

Unlike unaccusatives, unergatives cannot enter there-constructions`, as
proved by the ungrammatical sentences below:
(16)
a. * There grinned a murderer in the dark.
b. * There worked two men on the translation.

Transitive verbs do not enter the there` pattern either:
(17)
a.* There leIt Jane a chocolate cake on the plate.
b.* There wrote Jane a letter to the magazine editor.

However, iI the transitive verb is passivized, the there` pattern is possible:
(18)
a. There was a chocolate cake leIt (by Jane) on the plate.
86
b. There was a letter sent to the magazine editor (by Jane).

2.5. Semantic Classification of Unaccusatives
Unaccusatives are non-agentive in point oI meaning, their Subject
being marked Ior the Patient/ Theme role. They are semantically
specialized to indicate existence, occurrence, appearance ana
aisappearance, various aspectual tinges ( with ingressive values Ior the
beginning oI events, or with continuative or egressive/terminative values),
change of state (inchoative meanings), light or souna / noise emission by
physical objects etc.
Here are some oI the groups oI unaccusatives sharing one oI the
meaning Ieatures signalled above:
(i) existential, positional ana eventive verbs, including: be
exist, positional verbs such as lie, loom, sit, stana;
eventive verbs like happen, occur, take place,
(ii) inchoative verbs with a possible resultative meaning
including appear, emerge, bua, bloom, blossom, rot,
wither, aisappear, aie, perish, vanish;
(iii) miscellaneous verbs that indicate changes oI position as
a result oI movement: aangle, fall, quake, slip, stumble,
tremble, swav etc.
(iv) verbs that express physical processes about matter
(e.g. liquids) including boil, gush, float, flow, oo:e,
seethe, trickle etc.
(v) light or noise emission verbs like: bla:e, flash, glow,
glisten, gleam, glitter, shimmer etc., pop, clink, clatter,
fingle, rattle etc.

In point oI s-selection they all take |-animate| arguments as Patients. Some
oI them result Irom recategorization and deviate Irom this selectional
Ieature.

2.6. Syntactic Subcategorization of Unaccusatives
Unaccusatives can be basic / prototvpical or aerivea. Basic
unaccusatives include existential and eventive verbs, as well as verbs
indicating appearance and disappearance. They can all enter there`
constructions like:
(19)
a. There lived an old man in the attic.
87
b. There gushed a Iresh spring Irom the rock.

It has been noticed that the meaning oI basic unaccusative
subclasses is related: they denote existence either explicitly or implicitly.
This also explains why unaccusatives select two internal arguments:
minimally a single internal argument - Patient/Theme (which comes to
occupy the surIace Subject position), and maximally two internal
arguments Patient and Location (as shown by our examples above).
Basic unaccusatives never shiIt to the transitive regime. The only case oI
recategorization is the rare Iormation oI a Cognate Object, which is a
lexical copy oI the verb:
(20)
a. He livea a miserable life. She livea a life of plentv.
b. The soldier aiea a heroic aeath.

Unergatives, however, take such Cognate Objects more easily:
(21)
a. They slept the sleep of the aeaa.
b. I areamt a strange aream.
c. Sheila smilea an ironical smile.
d. The boy ran a long-aistance race.
e. They have fought a cruel battle.
I. We wagea an absura war.

Basic unaccusatives can enter constructions in which the Iocation
is topicalized by being placed in initial sentence position. This word order
peculiarity triggers the inversion between the verb and the subject. The
latter comes to occupy the Iinal, post-verbal position in the sentence:
(22)
a. On either side oI the street were tall, slim poplar trees.
b. Beyond the horizon appeared the red shape oI the rising sun.
c. Straight ahead was a new bank glass-and-metal building.
d. In the attic lived an old couple.

Neither unergatives, nor transitives enter this inverted structure:
(23)
a.. * In the mine toiled twelve youngsters. (unergative)
b. * In the library were reading periodicals the students.(transitive)

88
Derivea unaccusatives are the intransitive members oI verbs with a two-
Iold regime, which is oIten called ergative. Basically, ergatives are
transitive verbs with a causative meaning which have also developed an
intransitive (derived) counterpart expressing a resulting state:
(24)
a. The wina/ The fanitor openea the aoor. (Cause or Agent as
external argument, Patient as internal argument)
b. The aoor openea. (Patient as Subject)

The transitive conIiguration in (24)-a expresses an event in which
causation is implied. The intransitive pattern in (24)-b renders a resulting
state. The latter predicate is considered to belong to the subcategory oI
aerivea unaccusative. Because oI the inter-relation between the meaning oI
causation and the meaning oI resulting state, aerivea unaccusatives can co-
occur with resultative phrases expressed by Adjectival Phrases or
Prepositional Phrases:
(25)
a. The door banged shut.( AP Iunctioning as Predicative Adjunct
to the Subject)
b. The radio broke to pieces. ( PP with the same Iunction)

Another test` easily passed by unaccusatives is their possible occurrence in
the past participle Iorm with the Iunction oI Noun ModiIiers. The test is
also passed` by transitive verbs:
(26)
a. I bought a newlv appearea novel. (unaccusative)
b. I bought a newlv publishea novel (transitive)
c.* The miners were hara workea Iellows. (unergative)

The past participle used as a Noun ModiIier acquires an adjectival value; it
can be modiIied, like any other adjective by an Adverb, as shown by the
examples above. Other illustrations include:
(27)
vanishea customs, fallen trees, rotten apples, sunken ship etc.






89
3. Simple Intransitives with Adjuncts
Semantically, simple intransitives express events oI all types -
activities, processes or states with reIerence to a wide range oI
possible Subjects.
Syntactically, these predicates can take as optional adjuncts Iree
Prepositional Obfects, as well as Aaverbial Moaifiers oI various
kinds:
(28)
a. The girl was crving (bitterly).
Manner Adv
b. He aiea (peaceIully) (oI a heart disease).
Manner Adv Cause Adv.
c. They were aavancing (with cords) (toward the peak)
Ins PO Directional Adv

Syntactically speaking, the Prepositional the Adverbial Phrases
realizing the syntactic Iunctions illustrated above occur as optional
constituents oI the VP, as they do not determine the strict
subcategorization oI verbal lexical items. That is why, on the other
hand, they are not to be included in the inIormation supplied by the
Iexicon.
It is true, however, that there exists a correlation between the
semantics oI some verb classes and the possible occurrence oI some oI
these optional constituents. Manner Aaverbials raise most problems in
this respect. Indeed, these Adverbials can occur Ireely only with
predications that express non-stative, controllea states oI aIIairs. It
seems that Manner is implicit in states oI aIIairs designating actions,
positions and processes, but it need not be speciIied unless some
speciIic inIormation about the particular inIormation is given. Here
are some examples oI |controlled| states oI aIIairs that behave like
that; they are contrasted to sentences expressing states:
(29)
a. The students worked most ailigentlv. (activity)
b. The man was sleeping peacefullv. (process)
c. The dog was lying ialv. (position)
versus:
90
(30)
*The book was / seemed to be interesting enthusiasticallv.

The same type oI co-occurrence is to be encountered with
transitive verbs which express |controlled|, |dynamic| states oI
aIIairs.
Actually, the class oI Manner Adverbials subcategorizes as to the
semantic classes oI verbs they can Ireely co-occur with. Thus, cutting
across the transitive / intransitive subcategorization oI verbs, there are
the Iollowing subcategories oI Adverbs that verbs may take Ireely:
1. Manner Avs oI the type peacefullv are taken Ireely by transitive or
intransitive verbs which express |controlled| or |Dynamic| states oI
aIIairs.
2. Another class is typiIied by Avs such as recklesslv which are
compatible only with predications designating |controlled| states oI
aIIairs.
3. Avs like rhvthmicallv are compatible only with predications, be
they transitive or not, which designate |dynamic| states oI aIIairs.
4. Some Manner Avs are compatible only with those transitive or
intransitive predications expressing Actions (i.e. marked by
|controlled| and |dynamic|). The class includes Avs such as
energeticallv.

The adjuncts reIerred to above are represented in the structure oI the
IP as being adjoined to the Iirst V` under the VP node. This conIirms
the Iact that they have a looser relation with the core oI the respective
predication.











91


III. COMPOSITE PREDICATIONS



1. Explanation of the Cover 1erm :Composite Predication`
In the previous section we have gone into the syntax oI
`simple` intransitives, by which we mean lexical (meaningIul) verbs
which realize the semantic tasks oI predication. However, there are at
least two subtypes oI predicates, both in English and in other natural
languages, which have a composite structure, made up oI a `light`
verb (which has completely lost or partially weakened its meaning)
and another constituent that carries the main semantic load oI the
respective predication. Consider the Iollowing sentences:
(1)
a. Robert is quite eccentric. / a fresher.
b. Robert will take a walk / have a drink.

In (1)-a the predication consists oI the meaningless copula BE (an
intransitive unaccusative V) and the Preaicative expressed by an
Adjectival Phrase (quite eccentric) or a Noun Phrase (a fresher). Both
assign properties to the reIerent oI the Subject (Robert). In (1)-b the
predication is made up a light V, either take or have (both oI which are
transitive) Iollowed by a NP which carries the meaning oI the
respective activity.
Despite the dissimilarities between the two predications (in point oI
basic syntactic regime intransitive versus transitive) the two
composite` structures share the Iollowing Ieatures:
a. both have a binary internal structure correlated with one
global meaning
b. the Iirst constituent is light, being (almost) devoid oI
meaning
c. the second constituent is the main carrier oI meaning
d. the Iirst constituent is the carrier oI the markers oI the
verbal` categories (Tense, Aspect, Mood)
e. the second constituent is not verbal
We shall start by describing the copulative subtype`.
92

1.1. The S-Structure of Copulative Predicates
Copulative Preaicates are traditionally considered as having a binary
constituent structure. The two constituents that contribute in diIIerent
ways to the Iormation oI a copulative preaicate are:
a. a verbal item that belongs to the V subcategory oI copular or
copula-like verbs. The prototype oI this subcategory is the verb
BE, a light` verb (totally devoid oI meaning)
b. the Predicative expressed by a Phrase headed by an
Adjective, a Noun, a Preposition or a Complementizer). This
phrase serves to convey the meaning oI the predicate, by
assigning a property or an identity to the Subject oI the
sentence
Consider the structure and the meaning correlatives oI the predicates
below:
(2)
a. The show was quite successful. ( BE ` AP)
b. The show was a great success. ( BE ` NP)

The Copula BE has merged with the Tense in the InIlection, thus
placing the whole predication in the Past. But the actual meaning oI
the two copulative predicates is given by the Adjectival Phrase and the
Noun Phrase, respectively. They predicate the property oI being quite
successIul` oI the Subject the show`. The relation oI predication
seems to actually hold between the Subject and the Predicative.

1.2. Copular BE versus Other Types of BE
The verb BE enjoys a multiple status, especially iI we take into
account the semantic criterion. We can distinguish between:
a. existential BE, a meaningIul verb denoting existence in
space or time:
(3)
a. Some villas are on the outskirts of the town.
b. The svmposium is next Friaav.
The temporal meaning classes BE with eventives (e.g. happen, occur,
take place). Existential BE is an unaccusative verb that associates with
93
the role Theme. The Theme argument moves to Subject. II there is
also a Iocative it usually occurs in post-verbal position. It may also
occupy the initial position in the sentence:
(4)
a. Two fierce aogs were in the rear of the vara.
b. In the rear of the vara were two fierce aogs.

Quite oIten this BE enters there` constructions. They are labelled as
existential sentences`, the simplest oI which is the bare existential
sentence`:
(5)
a. There is Goa.
b. There are two answers to the question.
c. There was a rustling of papers.

Existential BE Iunctions as a lexical verb, which is proved by its
possible use as a lexical noun. Thus the derived verbal noun BEING
is deIined by an independent lexical entry in any dictionary as
meaning existence, substance, or essence.

b. copular BE: a light verb, serving as a link between the Subject and
the Predicative. Formally it behaves like the auxiliary BE (with Iew
exceptions)

c. auxiliary BE, the marker oI the Progressive Aspect or oI the
Passive; they can co-occur in the Present or in the Past Tense:
(6)
a. The application is being tvpea.
b. The application was being tvpea.

d. modal BE, regarded as a substitute Ior various tinges oI modality
(necessity, possibility). It selects an InIinitive Complement:
(7)
a. The aelegation is to arrive tomorrow.
b. Coal is to be founa in the north of the countrv.

94
1.3. Formal/Structural Properties of all BEs
a) BE does not require DO-insertion (except Negative Imperatives
like Dont be so cheekv');
b) in Questions it undergoes inversion with the Subject, e.g. Is the
puppv in the kennel? Is it barking? Is it black ana white?);
c) the Negator is inserted aIter BE and contraction can Ireely apply,
e.g. This pupil is not (isnt) cheekv.
d) all types oI BE can undergo BE deletion or alternate with
constructions reduced Irom BE predications in contexts like Relative
Clauses (the paa which is on the aesk --- the paa on the desk),
Accusative with Infinitive constructions (I considered Chomskv (to
be) a genius), Time Adverbial Clauses introduced by when or while
(Tom is verv wittv when/while (he is) sober)
e) all BEs can undergo There-Insertion, e.g. There is a puppv in the
kennel, There is a man crving for help, There are two kias sick in
bea.
I) all BEs can be resumed by Question Tags: Shes French, isnt she?
That man is in prison, isnt he? Thev are learning the poem, arent
thev?

1.4. Particular Properties of Copular and Existential BE Types
a) Copular and existential BE can combine with the auxiliary Ior the
PerIective aspect and with the modal auxiliaries Ior rendering Iuturity.
(8)
a. Sheila has been / haa been concernea with phvsics for two
vears.
b. Sheila has been / haa been this campus since she was 18.
c. Brian will be the winner of the contest.
d. Brian will be in Manchester tomorrow.

Copular BE may be marked Ior the Progressive aspect with non-
stative adjectives denoting momentary behavior:
(9)
Janet is being cheekv.

95
b) Existential BE assigns the role Theme, which, as in the case
oI other unaccusatives moves to Subject. The sentence thus
Iormed requires the obligatory insertion oI the expletive
Iormal Subject THERE:
(10)
There are some cases of bira flu.
It can also take a Iocation-marked Adjunct as in:
(11)
There are some cases of bira flu in the Danube Delta.

Some linguists interpret this BE as taking a Small Clause as an
internal argument.
The properties oI copula-like verbs will be discussed separately, aIter
the brieI presentation oI the way Predicatives are expressed in English.

2. Constituents Distributed as Predicatives in S-Structure
The Predicative, i.e. the constituent which conveys the meaning oI the
whole copulative predication, can be realized by one oI the
constituents below:
a. Adjectival Phrase (AP)
b. Noun Phrase (NP) simple/non-clausal constituents
c. Prepositional Phrase (PP)
d. Complementizer Phrase (CP) clausal constituents (finite or non-
finite)
We shall illustrate below each oI the possibilities listed above:
(12)
a. This teacher is absent-minaea. property-assigner)
AP - property-assigner
b. This teacher is the Heaa of the English Department.
NP - identity-assigner

c. This teacher is in neea of monev.
PP - property-asigner
The problem is that this teacher is in neea of monev (finite
clause). CP - property-assigner
d. The problem is to fina the monev. ( non-finite clause)
InI CP property-assigner
96

As shown above the lexical content conveyed by the Phrase in
Predicative position may be oI two kinds:
a) to assign a propertv or an attribute to the reIerent oI the
Subject NP, hence its labelling as attributive`:
(13)
a. Peter is fanciful.
b. Peter is a poet.
c. Peter is a fanciful poet. (the last variant assigns two
properties by means oI the NP)

b) to asssign an iaentitv to the reIerent oI the Subject NP, thus
Iunctioning as 'iaentifier', and being labelled as equative or
identiIying:
(14)
a. Eve is my brother's wife.
b. Jim is the leader of our party.

We notice that the NPs Iunctioning as Predicatives in attributive`
versus equative` predications diIIer in point oI determination. The
Ieature on indeIiniteness (realized by Dets such as indeIinite articles,
indeIinite quantiIiers etc.) characterizes the NPs that assign properties.
On the contrary, identiIying NPs have a |deIinite| determination
(realized by deIinite articles, demonstrative, possessives). A more
detailed picture oI these two types is supplied in section XXX.

2.1. Theta-role Assignment in Copulative Structures
In what Iollows we shall analyze copulative structures Irom
the viewpoint oI arguments and corresponding theta roles. The Iirst
question arising about both types deIined above the attributive` and
the equative` ones is to identiIy the constituent which determines the
logico-semantic interpretation oI the whole construction. As a rule this
part is played by the central` lexical verb which selects its arguments
and assigns them the appropriate roles. But the verb BE is light, i.e.
devoid oI Iull lexical content, so it cannot do the normal job oI a
lexical verb. Still we intuit that the respective constructions are
underlain by a relation oI predication. Iet us supply gender-marked
97
variants Ior some oI the sentences in (13) and (14), with a view to
showing how agreement works:
(15)
a. Peter is a poet.
b. Emily is a poetess.
c. *Peter is a poetess.

We notice that the `predicator` (property-assigner in the cases
above) is in Iact the Predicative, which agrees with the reIerent oI the
Subject in gender and number. While the Noun `poet` belongs to the
common gender, possibly co-occurring with either male or Iemale
gender oI the Subject, poetess` uniquely reIers to a woman who
writes poetry. The ungrammatical sentence (15)-c conIirms the tight
predication relationship between the Predicative and the Subject. The
Predicative is the one that s-selects the Subject. Thus the NP a
poetess` can only predicate this property oI a Iemale reIerent oI the
Subject. Agreement in gender as a prooI oI the close predication
relationship between the Predicative and the Subject also works in
equative` structures:
(16)
a. Eve is my brother`s wife.
b. * Eve is my brother`s husband.

II the deIinite NP that assigns an identity is marked Ior gender
then this type oI agreement holds between the Subject and the
respective Predicative. This Predicative, similar to verbal predicators
imposes, as we have already seen, certain selectional restrictions upon
its Subject.
We conclude hereby that copular BE structures do incorporate
predication relations, but they are established between the Predicative
(i.e. any constituent discharging this Iunction, be it an AP, a NP, a PP
or a CP) and the Subject. This leads to the hypothesis that the Subject
and the Predicative Iorm a Clause at D-Structure level.

2.2. The Hypothetical D-Structure of Copulative Predicates
The hypotheses regarding the basic conIiguration oI sentences
based on copular predication assume that they are derived Irom
D-Structures in which BE, like all unaccusative verbs, lacks an
external argument, hence the S-Structure Subject position is initially
empty, conIirming the Iact that copular BE does not take an external
98
argument. It selects an internal argument oI the clausal type. We
suggested above that this clause lacks a verb, being made up oI the
Subject NP and oI the Predicative. We recognize here the Small
Clause type, a verbless structure, whose predicator` is a non-verbal
constituent.
Given the sentence below and its surIace constituent structure:
(17)
Monkevs are very cute. [ AP j [Pres, 3plj [[BEj [APjj
Spec InIl Cop Predicative

we shall assume that the basic conIiguration looks as Iollows:

(18)
[ j [Pres, 3plj [ BE [ AP, APjj

Empty InIl Cop |monkeys - very cute|
Spec Subj NP Pred. AP

BE is comparable here to verbs like SEEM, APPEAR, HAPPEN etc.
that take a complement clause whose Subject raises to the surIace
position |Spec, VP| leaving behind a trace. Consider by comparison:
(19)
Monkevs seem very cute.

Which can be derived Irom a D-Structure identical with the one in
(17) by raising the NP monkeys` to the empty Spec position, actually
the canonical Subject position in English:
(20)
| Monkevs
i
| |InIl| |seem | t
i
|verv cute||

The raising verb` seem requires that the NP monkeys` should be
raised in surIace Subject position. This NP movement leaves behind a
trace t, coindexed with the raised NP.
But we also notice that the clausal complement oI both seem and be is
a Small Clause, i.e. a verbless clause, made up oI a SpeciIier (the deep
Subject NP oI the Small Clause) and a predicate reduced to the
Predicative expressed by the AP. The deep syntactic conIigurations
producing surIace copular structures would look as Iollows:


99
(21)
[ j [Inflj [BEj [Small Clausej

Where the Small Clause (SC) may have one oI the verbless structures
in the Iollowing set (the examples are resumed Irom (12) above:
(22)
a. SC: [ AP, APj e.g.
| this teacher, absent-minaea|
d. SC: [AP, AP] e.g.
| this teacher, the heaa of the English aepartment|
e. SC: [ AP, PPj e.g.
| this teacher, in neea of monev|

The NP this teacher`, which is the deep Subject oI the Small Clause
will be raised to Iill the Subject position oI the whole sentence.
II the Predicative is clausal the Small Clause has the same
binary structure:
(23)
a. SC: [ AP, that CPj e.g.
| the problem, |that this teacher is in need oI money||
b. SC: [ AP, to Inf CPj e.g.
| the problem, | to Iind the money||

Coming back to the hypothesis that BE is a raising verb` like SEEM,
HAPPEN a.s.o we should point out, however, that the latter can also
take Iinite or non-Iinite complement clauses predicated by lexical
verbs. BE is limited, according to this hypothesis to selection oI a
Small Clause.
Another problem that has to be solved is that oI case
assignment. The deep Subject realized by the NP in the Small Clause
has to move to the higher position oI SpeciIier oI IP to receive
morphological case Irom the InIlection. This is due to the Iact that BE
is an unaccusative verb which cannot assign case to its internal
argument. Raising oI the Subject oI the Small Clause to the position oI
Subject oI the whole sentence also depends on the internal
constituency oI the SC. Thus iI the SC belongs to the attributive type
(specialized Ior property assignment) it is only the Subject NP that can
raise to Subject oI IP. But in case the predication in the SC belongs to
the equative/identiIying type there are two possibilities, determined by
100
the presence in the Small Clause oI two deIinite NPs. Compare the
examples below:
(24)
a. This Romanian pianist is a great artist. (attributive,
IndeIinite NP as property-assigner)
b. This Romanian pianist is the winner of the prize. (equative,
DeIinite NP as identiIier)
II we try movement oI the Predicative NP to Subject we end
up with an ungrammatical sentence in (24)-a. But (24)-b can produce
by means oI NP movement two well-Iormed strings: the one above
and the alternative:
(25)
The winner oI the contest is this Romanian pianist.
Reversibility oI the two NPs under the condition oI deIiniteness is
apparent at surIace level. This makes identiIying BE structures behave
like symmetric predicates.

2.3. Syntactic Features of Copula-like Verbs
Copula-like verbs behave like the prototypical copula BE in
point oI combinatorial possibilities. However they do not Iorm a
homogeneous subcategory. We may assume that they enter the same
D-Structure conIiguration as BE. They are also unaccusative verbs
with no external argument. Iike BE they take an internal Small Clause
argument as Complement. But the structural variety oI this Small
Clause evinced by BE is reduced in the case oI copula-like verbs. The
set oI structures predicated by BECOME shows that this inchoative /
change-oI-state verb behaves like BE by selecting Adjectival and
Nominal Predicatives. But it never takes clausal (CP) as Predicatives:
(26)
a. The shoe-lace became loose.
b. The guy became an architect.
c.* The shoe-lace became to be loose.
d. *The problem became that we might fail.

Iet us now compare the selectional range oI BECOME to that
oI COME, when the latter is used as an inchoative:
(27)
a. The shoe-lace came loose.
b. *The guy came an architect.
c. *The problem came that we might fail.
101
d. The problem came to be solved.

This verb, although very similar to its synonym, never takes Nominal
Predicatives or that`-clauses. Instead it accepts InIinitive
Complements.
Another verb oI becoming` RUN, like many copula-like
verbs that shall list below only combines with Adjectives and
Prepositional Phrases in Predicative position:
(28)
a. Her Ieet ran cold.
b. The Iamily ran into debts.

All this convincingly proves that even within one and the same
semantic subclass the items behave idiosyncratically.
Copula-like verbs are derived Irom lexical/meaningIul verbs
by partial loss oI their content, which comes to be reduced to some
Ieatures, usually related to change-oI-state or to aspect. Still, Irom a
formal point oI view they continue to behave as Iull verbs. Thus they
resort to ao-support (insertion oI the auxiliary do in the present or past
oI interrogative and negative sentences); they do not undergo
inversion with the Subject in interrogative sentences etc. The degree
oI lightness` oI the copula is maximal, which accounts Ior the Iact
that copular BE has the same Iormal behavior as auxiliaries. Copula-
like verbs also impose selectional restrictions upon the constituents oI
the Small Clause they take, Iorming relatively Iixed patterns with the
selected items. Thus GO as a verb oI becoming only combines with
Small Clauses with an Adjectival Predicative headed by a well-
deIined, limited list oI adjectives, among which maa, hungrv or bala
and never by other items such as intelligent, polite or warm:
(29)
a. He went bala while very young.
b. * He went warm with excitement.

The same holds good Ior other copula-like verbs like TURN which
can only combine with an NP determined by the zero article in order
to convey a negative, sudden or indesirable property (change) oI the
Subject:
(30)
a. Mr. Jones turned nationalist.
b. His aunt turned Catholic.
102

In conclusion the lexical entry Ior each oI these verbs has to inIorm
about the restrictions they impose on their Predicatives (derived Irom
the D-Structure Small Clause they take as Complement).

2.4. Semantic Subclassification of Copula-like Verbs
Although copula-like verbs are semantically poor or light, they
still preserve one or several semantic Ieatures which are remnants
Irom the primary substantive content oI the corresponding lexical
verbs they derive Irom. One might establish a semantic scale, a
gradient oI these verbs, having at one end a copula-like verb like
MAKE (a quasi-synonym oI BE or BECOME, and at the other end the
group oI sense perception` intransitives (e.g. Ieel, taste, sound, look
etc.) which are totally meaningIul, but behave syntactically like the
other copula-like verbs. In between we might place by aspectual verbs
oI duration and remaining (remain, rest, continue, hold), verbs of
becoming (inchoatives) and positional verbs (lie, loom, stand, rank)
which imply an existential Ieature.
Summing up, the relevant semantic Ieature Ior a Iurther
subclassiIication oI copula-like verbs are:

| aspectual| remain, rest etc.
| inchoative| become, go, run etc.
| positional| loom, stana, sit etc.
| sense perception| taste, smell, souna etc.

In what Iollows we shall make an inventory oI the main sentence
patterns predicated by the respective verbs.

2.4.1. Usage of Copula-like Jerbs
We shall start by describing the recategorized verb MAKE,
which is extremely light, it being very close semantically to the
prototypical copula BE and to the verb BECOME. Its meaning is: be,
result in being, aevelop into. Here are some illustrations oI syntactic
Irames entered by this light verb, which is basically a transitive verb
oI manuIacturing:
(31)
| _ Pred NP|
a. Iucy will make a very good wife.
b. Jim and Anna make a good-looking couple.
103
c. This novel makes excellent reading.
d. Will you make a fourth at poker?

The Predicative is an NP, usually a |- deIinite| one.

2.4.2. Aspectual Copula-like Jerbs
Copula-like verbs may also express the continuation oI a state,
usually oI a property, rendered by an Adjectival or a Nominal
Predicative:
(32)
a. | _ AP| The weather continuea fine./ She remainea faithful.
b. | _ NP| My aunt remainea a widow.

The verb rest` may take participial adjectives in Predicative position:
(33)
You may rest assured that our plans will come true.

The copula-like verb hold` also conveys the idea oI continuity, in
combinations with Adjectival predicatives.
(34)
a. His theory still holas good.
b. She always held hola aloof Irom her mates.

2.4.3. Inchoative Copula-like Jerbs
We shall Iocus on some oI the items in the semantic subclass oI
inchoative verbs, most oI which have been recategorized Irom
intransitive motion verbs: come, go, fall, run, turn.
The prototype oI this class is BECOME, which has already been
described as a verb with a multiple regime. It exclusively takes non-
clausal Predicatives:
(35)
a. | _ AP| The sky became darker.
b. | _ NP| My daughter has become an opera singer.

The verbs GET and GROW are basically transitive; however, they
occur as well in copulative predications with an inchoative meaning.
Their combinatorial possibilities are illustrated below:


104
(36)
a. | _ AP| It was getting late. / She grew pale./The crop is
growing bigger and bigger.
b. | _ PP| They have got to words and then to blows.
c. | _ InI CP| She is growing to be prettier.

Inchoatives that have as lexical counterparts motion verbs preserve
Irom the latter the sense oI transition Irom one departure point`, an
initial stage to a destination point`, corresponding to a new resulting
stage. Iet us consider the already mentioned verbs come, go and run:
(37)
a. The seam has come unstitched.
b. The tire went flat.
c. Money ran low.

The three examples indicate a transition to a resulting stage when a
state, in particular a new property is acquired by the reIerent oI the
Subject. Most oI the patterns speciIy negative attributes expressed by
possibilities are more varied:
(38)
a. | _ AP | The joke fell flat. / The child fell asleep.
b. | _ AP, PP| Her career fell short oI my expectations.
c. | _ NP| He fell a victim to his new boss.
d. | _ PP | The old woman fell into a doze / a deep sleep.

The various combinations have a quasi-idiomatic character, being
relatively Iixed or Irozen (e.g. fall heir to smb. fall a prev to smb., fall
in love/out of love, fall in aisgrace etc.)

2.4.4. Positional Copula-like Jerbs
Unaccusative verbs denoting position in space may occur as
copula-like items, generally Iollowed in S-Structure by Adjectival
Predicatives. They cease to Iunction as lexical verbs, while still
preserving a tinge oI their original meaning. The list oI light verbs in
this subclass includes: lie, loom, rank and stana.
The verb LIE takes APs in Predicative position:
(39)
a. The dictionary lav open on the desk.
b. The pork stew lav heavv on his stomach.
c. The pen was lving iale beside the rubber.
105
d. The snow lav thick on the ground.

Combinations like lie open, lie heavv, lie low are relatively Irozen and
occur not only with a literal meaning, but also with a Iigurative one:
(40)
a. He decided to lie low Ior a while.
b. Their separation lav heavv on his conscience.

The verbs stand and rank also occur with a literal or a Iigurative
meaning when used as copula-like light verbs:
(41)
a. Tom stanas alone among his colleagues.
b. My Iamily stanas / ranks high in the community.
c. He stanas correctea. We will stana firm (ana fast).

The verb stand may take a NP or a PP as Predicative:
(42)
a. He stood goafather to my son.
b. I stana in neea of help.

The verb LOOM takes APs as Predicatives:
(43)
a. The threat oI the Tsunami loomea large in their minds.
b. The tower loomea menacing in the distance.

The copula-like verb SIT occurs in Irozen idioms with Adjectival
Predicatives, as illustrated by the literal and Iigurative use oI the
phrase to sit tight meaning to remain Iirmly in one's place, esp. in the
saaale. Figuratively it means to stick Iirmly to one's purpose or
opinions.
Originally a motion verb, PASS may be used as a copula-like verb oI
evaluation, being Iollowed by a PP marked by the Iixed preposition
for or as:
(44)
a. The Iamily passes for rich.
b. He passes for a learnea man.
c. She passes as an experiencea teacher.

106
2.4.5. Sense Perception Copula-like Jerbs
Intransitives that denote involuntarv sense perception are lexical verbs
which behave like copulas in point oI combinatorial Ieatures. They
have a Iull meaning, but instead oI being modiIied by an Adverb as in
other languages, they are completed` by a Predicative AP. This
applies to all the verbs in this subclass, i.e. FEEL, TASTE, SOUND,
SMELL, LOOK:
(45)
a. Velvet feels soft. The oven feels hot. Your palm feels aamp.
b. Iemons taste sour. This cake tastes too sweet.
c. His laugh sounas hollow. This news sounas increaible.
d. The spring air smells crisp. This dish smells aelicious.
e. Her hair style looks ola-fashionea. His suit looks smart.

Intransitive sense perception verbs behaving like copulas are |state|
predicators. They may be recategorized as |- state| verbs belonging to
transitive verbs that denote deliberate activities:
(46)
a. Mary is feeling the velvet.
b. Mother always tastes the dishes beIore serving them.
c. The kid is sounaing the drum.
d. I smellea the lilac Ilowers.
e. They were looking at the slides.

2.4.6. Final Remarks
The syntactic status oI copula-like verbs only partially overlaps
with that oI the prototypical copula BE. Thus these verbs never enter
symmetric predicates like the equative BE predications. The
reversibility test` shows that they yield ungrammatical strings iI the
Subject and the Predicative inter-change positions:
(47)
a. John became a TV moderator.
b. *A TV moderator became John.
c. Vinegar tastes sour.
d. *Sour tastes vinegar.

In point oI combinatorial possibilities the dominant Ieatures seems to
be the co-occurrence with Adjectival Phrases denoting properties.
Clausal Predicatives are rare. II they do occur aIter a copula-like verb
107
like COME, Ior instance, they are non-Iinite, usually InIinitival
Complements.

3. More about the Logico-semantic Subtypes: Attributive versus
Equative Predicates
Resuming the description oI the structure and meaning oI copulative
predications in English, we shall try to deepen the logico-semantic
classiIication already mentioned, which distinguishes between: a) The
Attributive Subtvpe and b) The Equative Subtvpe (also called
Iaentifving).

3.1. The Attributive Subtype: Class-membership and
Class-inclusion
The Attributive Subtvpe is based upon the Iormula:
(48)
A is B, where A z B
e.g. This poem is a haiku. * A haiku is this poem

The term A is the Attributea, i.e. the entity to which the predicate
assigns a property/attribute, and B is the Attribuant, i.e. the one
designating the respective property. BE links the Attribuant to the
Attributea. A and B are irreversible, this being a one-term predication.
A is grammatically realized by a deIinite or indeIinite NP, while B
may be:
(49)
a. an AP, as in: The show has been successful.
b. an inaefinite NP, as in: The show has been a success.
c. a PP, as in: Academic liIe is in full swing.
d. a CP (Clause), as in: His main goal is to win the contest.
InI CP

Semantically, all these Copulative Predicates express a set/class oI
entities the Subject NP is correlated with. This relation may be oI two
kinds:
(50)
class-membership: A B

e.g. Helen is plump.
Helen is a plump woman.
108

All the predications in (48) belong to this logical subtype, by means oI
which a property/attribute B is assigned to the term A Iunctioning as
Subject. Here are Iurther examples in which an AP or an indeIinite NP
Iunctioning as Predicative assigns a property to the Subject NP:
(51)

The show
has been successful

has been a success
A B

The term A represented by the NP the show has a unique and
particular reIerent in reality, while B, the attribute oI being successful
or being a success Iorms a set oI potential reIerents Ior A (the show).
The term A is related with one unspeciIied element oI the set oI
successIul entities. The class-membership subtype may also be
realized by PPs and Clauses.
The second variant oI the attributive subtype observes the logical
Iormula:
(52)
class-inclusion: A B

A / The sonnet is a poem.
Sonnets are poems.

The term A, corresponding to the Subject designates a smaller set of
entities included into a larger set designated by B and expressed by a
Predicative NP.
The set oI potential reIerents oI A is included into the set oI potential
reIerents oI B:
(53)
a. A/The butterflv is an insect.
b. Butterflies are insects.
A B
The Predicative oI such constructions is always nominal, it being
expressed by a singular or a plural NP ( marked by the zero article),
agreeing in number with the Subject NP.
With both subtypes reversibility oI A and B results in ungrammatical
strings:

109
(54)
a. *Successful has been the show.
b. *Insects are butterflies.

DeIinite NPs are excluded Irom the Predicative position in attributive
predications.

3.2. The Equative or Identifying Subtype
This Subtvpe is based upon the Iormula oI symmetric predications:
(55)
A B, consequently B A


e.g. Mr Crow is the stage director.
The stage director is Mr Crow.

The A term is the Iaentifiea and B term is the Iaentifier. The copula
BE equates the IdentiIied with the IdentiIier. A is grammatically
realized by a deIinite NP and B by one oI the Iollowing constituents:
(1) a aefinite NP, determined by a DeIinite Article, a Possessive or a
Demonstrative Determiner, or by a zero Article used with NPs
designating unique jobs, positions, Iunctions:
(56)
a. This guy is Susans brother/ the leaaer of our partv.
b. Tony Blair is the UK Prime Minister.
c. Tony Blair is Prime Minister of the UK.

(2) a Pro-N Iorm (including a Det P in a Pro-N position):
(57)
a. I wonder who the stranger might be.
b. The solution is this.
c. The dictionary is mine.
c. The explanation is the same.

(3) a Superlative AP or a Comparative AP with a superlativeIorce:
(58)
a. That actress is the most talentea/ the prettiest.
b. That actress is the more talentea / the prettier of the two.

110
(4) a CP, usually a Iinite Independent Relative Clause, an Indirect
Question or a non-Iinite Gerund Clause:
(59)
a. His behavior was what noboav coula explain.
b. The question was where the stranger haa come from.
c. What upset his Iamily was his marrving so voung.

4. 1ypology of Adjectival Predicatives
Predicatives expressed by Adjectival Phrases can be Iurther
subclassiIied according to the Iollowing criteria:
(i) lexical and semantic Ieatures
(ii) distributional/ Iunctional properties
(iii) both (i) and (ii)
In discussing the resulting typology we must bear in mind that Irom a
logical point oI view APs assign properties, i.e. they are attributive.
As we have already shown, Adjectives are secona-rank preaicators in
a hypothetical hierarchy with Verbs ranking Iirst.
Iike Verbs, Adjectives may be subclassiIied semantically as
|state| or |- state| items. The number oI state adjectives exceeds that
oI non-state ones. Examples oI the Iormer include adjectives
indicating color, shape, size, nationality, material, temperature etc.
like blue, violet, rea, white etc.; rouna, square, flat, sharp, pointea,
oblique; big, small, tall, average, tinv, huge etc.; Russian, Dutch,
French, German, Swiss etc.; liquia, wooaen, vegetal, chemical,
woolen etc.; cola, warm, hot, free:ing, scorching etc. Adjectives that
denote behavior are |-state| and, like activity verbs, they can occur in
copulative predications with Progressive BE and in Imperatives. The
Iexicon includes non-stative adjectives like: amiable, anxious,
boastful, courageous, calm, cheekv, impolite, impuaent, malicious,
nastv, noisv, tolerant, merciless, merciful, pushv, shv, timia, worriea
etc.
An important semantic Ieature that brings about Iurther
subclasiIication oI Adjectives is graaabilitv. Adjectives that denote
|gradable| properties vary according to the category oI Comparison,
i.e. they have Comparative and Superlative degrees. Unlike them
ungradable adjectives lack Comparison, e.g.: *more round, *very
Dutch, *the most woolen, *more violet, *very square etc.
From a lexical point oI view Adjectives may be non-derived or
derived Irom other lexical categories (i.e. Irom Noun or Verb sources).
111
The syntactic criterion oI distribution / Iunction subcategorizes
the lexical category oI Adjectives into Predicative and Noun
ModiIiying ones. The Iormer co-occur with Copulas and Copula-like
verbs, the latter occupy the position oI SpeciIier oI the head Noun. We
shall see that this distributional criterion triggers Iurther subcategorization.
Most Adjectives in the Iexicon can be either predicative or modiIying
as proved by:
(60)
a. 1.The cloth was very soft. (BE ` AP)
2. a very soft cloth ( Det ` AP ` N)
b. 1. This novel is famous (BE ` AP)
2. this famous novel ( Det ` AP ` N)


In what Iollows we shall Iocus on Predicative Adjectives, signaling as
well idiosyncratic Ieatures regarding their possible use as Noun
ModiIiers.

4.1. Lexically Derived Adjectives in Predicative Position
Adjectives derived Irom Noun sources are called aenominal.
They are Iormed by conversion (zero aIIix), e.g. the ones derived Irom
mass nouns: silver, iron, steel, air, water etc. These denominal
adjectives occur most Irequently as Noun ModiIiers, being disallowed
Irom the Predicative position:
(61)
a. a silver spoon, silver clouas, silver sounas, a silver weaaing
b. *The spoon / the wedding is silver.// *The clouds/ sounds are
silver.
The meaning oI the Predicatives in (60) b is either maae of
silver or like silver. However some denominal adjectives may appear
as Predicatives iI a Iigurative meaning is intended:
(62)
a.
The wooaen stool *The stool is wooaen.
That leaaen bullet *That bullet was leaaen.
Her golaen chain *That chain is golaen.

b. The old man`s movements are wooden ( like wood)
The lake surIace was leaaen ( like lead)
The wheat Iield was golaen. ( like gold)
112

Deverbal Aafectives (derived Irom Verb sources) otIen appear in
Preaicative positions. Some oI them are converted Irom participles
(-ing or -en), some others are derived by suffixation or prefixation.
An important subcategory is that oI psychological adjectives
derived Irom the class oI psvchological preaicates realized by
transitive verbs with Experiencer Direct Objects: ama:e, astonish,
bewilaer, baffle, confuse, aelight, aisgust, flabbergast, non-plus,
please, pu::le, perples, interest, overwhelm, aisappoint, aisgust,
horrifv, frighten, scare, surprise etc.
These predicates enter conIigurations like:
(63)
a. The news ama:ea the 1J watchers.
b. My gesture has bafflea everybody around.
c. The symphony aelightea the audience.
d. The vista surprisea the tourists.

The Subject bears the role Cause, expressing the stimulus oI the
Ieeling aroused in the reIerent oI the Direct Object, marked Ior the
role Experiencer. These verbs represent sources Ior the derivation oI
two series oI participial adjectives:
-ing participles occurring as either Predicatives or Noun ModiIiers:
(64)
a. The prospects were Irightening.
b. the Irightening prospects

II used predicatively, most oI these adjectives may take an
Experiencer as Indirect Objects marked by the dative preposition to:
(65)
a. His words were quite pleasing to my ear.
b. The news was surprising to the villagers.

-en participles used as either Predicatives or Noun ModiIiers:
(66)
a. The boy was Irightened at the thunder.
b. the Irightened boy

113
These participial adjectives select Experiencer Subjects and Cause
marked Prepositional Objects. The prepositions most Irequently used
are at, in and with: scarea / surprisea at, interestea in, aelightea
/pleasea / aisgustea / concernea with etc. The alternative preposition
Ior all these items is the agentive or instrumental by`, whose use
emphasizes agentivity or deliberate causation oI the respective Ieeling:
(67)
The boy was surprised bv the wickea ola man/ bv the arrow.

ExpSubj be ^-en A Ag/Ins PO


4.1.1. A Case of Ambiguitv: Copulative Preaicate
or Statal/Agentless Passive?
The conIiguration BE -en participle might be considered to
be ambiguous between a copulative reading (i.e. copula Iollowed by
Predicative) and a passive reading (i.e. aux BE Iollowed by the verbal
past participle):
(68)
a. The van was unloaaea.
b. The town was aesertea.
c. Her hair was avea.
d. The doors were shut.

In the contexts above the two constructions seem to overlap, as both
patterns are stative descriptions oI a resulting property assigned to the
Subject. II we add Aspect to the respective predications, be it
Progressive or PerIective, the respective predication gets
disambiguated, the passive reading becoming obvious :
(69)
a. The van is being unloaaea (bv the shopkeeper).
b. The town has been aesertea (bv its inhabitants).
c. Her hair has been avea (bv the best hair stvlist).
d. The doors are being shut (bv the fanitor).

In the ambiguous sentences in (68) the Agent role is suppressed, while
in the aspect-marked variants whose predications are non-stative the
Agent is implicit or even explicit/overt, it occurring as a Prepositional
by-Object.
114
Another case oI passive and copulative overlapping is the
possible expression oI the applicability oI an activity to an entity by
means oI the so-called passive adjectives derived Irom transitive
verbs, by adding the Romance suIIixes -able or -ible, and, in the
negative variant, the preIixes un- or i(n)-: divide o divisible o
indivisible; retrieve o retrievable o irretrievable; solve o solvable
o unsolvable, etc.
They occur in a syntactic Irame similar to that oI passive sentences,
with a topicalized DO (moved to the Subject position) and a
Prepositional Object oI Agent or Instrument that Iollows the
copulative predicate):
(70)
a. This linen is unwashable by machine.
b. Those data are retrievable by a computer.
c. The problem is unsolvable by an inexperienced technician.
The suIIix renders the meaning oI (im)possibility, hence the respective
predications may be paraphrased by patterns with can(not) Iollowed
by a passive inIinitive :
(71)
a. This linen cannot be washea by machine.
b. Those data can be retrievea by a computer.

The close inter-relationship between the V subcategory and the A one,
especially when it comes to derivation oI A items Irom V sources is
Iurther proved by the adjective subcategories in the next section.

4.1.2. Prepositional Deverbal Aafectives
Other transitive verbs like mina, envv, forget, regret etc. which
select Experiencer Subfects can derive by suIIixation adjectives with
a Iixed preposition as shown below :
(72)
to mina smth. (to be) minaful of smth
to envv smth. (to be) envious of smth
to hope smth (to be/Ieel) hopeful of/about smth
to forget smth (to be) forgetful of smth
to regret smth (to be) regretful about smth

Such adjectives are Irequently used in literary or highly Iormal
English. Their theta grid is made up oI Experiencer and Theme. The
115
latter is realized by a Prepositional Object, instead oI a Direct Object
as in the case oI the corresponding transitive verb:
(73)
a. You should be minaful oI the needs oI the others.
b. This employee is forgetful oI his duty.
c. The President is regretful about the unsolved crisis.

However, there are some syntactic Ieatures that diIIerentiate the
respective verbs Irom the corresponding derived adjectives. Thus most
oI these verbs allow complementation by Iinite or non-Iinite CPs,
while the adjectives listed above disallow clause complements.

5. Subcategorization of Adjectives into Predicative and Modifying
It has been pointed out that adjectives have a twoIold
distribution. The regular` ones can occur as predicative or as
modifying items entering the two distinct Irames: that oI a copulative
predicate or the one oI a Noun Phrase. These regular` adjectives do
not evince semantic diIIerences between the two uses. In both cases
they assign properties to reIerents oI NPs. However, English, like
other natural languages, includes in the Iexicon some `irregular`
classes oI adjectives, which can be subdivided into:
a) exclusively preaicative aafectives
b) exclusively moaifving aafectives
c) adjectives that may occur in either position, but with meaning
diIIerences.

5.1. Exclusively Predicative Adjectives
An important subcategory among exclusivelv Prea As is made
up oI a series oI "adverb-like" adjectives preIixed by a- and indicating
state or conaition: abla:e, afloat, afraia, aghast, akin, afar, alike,
alive, alone, ashamea, askew, asleep, averse, awake a.s.o.
(74)
a. Ten blue canoes were afloat.
b. The dry tree was abla:e.
c. The kids were all asleep.

Some oI these Prea As take Prepositional Objects, their prepositions
being Iixed, thereIore speciIied in the Iexicon:

116
(75)
a. Tom was ashamea of his immoral conduct.
b. These immigrants are not averse to hard work.
c. Our street is aafacent to the boulevard.
d. The harbor was abla:e with lights.
e. Music is akin to poetry.

The possibility to select a complement clause Iurther subcategorizos
these Prea As. Thus, afraia, ashamea, awake may take complement
clauses:
(76)
a. Henry was aware of being cheatea. (Ger Cl)
b. I was aIraid even to turn his heaa. (InI Cl)
c. She was aIraid (that) she might aamage her car. (that C1)

II quantiIied, some oI these adjectives may occur as Noun ModiIiers:
(77)
a. On the platIorm there was a half asleep woman.
b. The jury cross-examined a fullv aware convict.
c. I talked to a somewhat afraia stranger.

Some oI them may modiIy nouns only iI they occupy a post-head
position:
(78)
a. Twain described life afloat.
b. The room with the aoor afar looked dark.
c. The Iiremen climbed to the roof abla:e.

Another subcategory oI Prea As includes prepositional
adjectives other than the a-preIixed ones. Some oI them are derived
Irom verbs. Although they can never Iunction as pre-nominal
modiIiers, they do appear, however, in post-nominal modiIying
positions:
(79)
a. Kids are fona of sweets. (*fona kias)
b.Negligence is conaucive to acciaents. (*conaucive
negligence)
c. This student is exempt from tuition fees? (*an exempt stuaent)
d. His departure is tantamount to a breach in their marriage.
(*a tantamount aeparture)
117
This subcategory also includes prone to smth, subfect to smth. glaa
of/about smth, sorrv for smth etc. The respective Prea As above may
occur in modiIying (oIten reduced relative clauses ( in post-head
position):
(80)
a. * a sorrv chila
b. a child (who is) sorrv for his pranks

Some oI these predicative prepositional adjective may select a
complement clause, be it Iinite or non-Iinite:
(81)
a. They are content with their fobs./ to have these fobs./that
thev have these fobs.
b. I am sorrv for this mishap./ to witness this mishap./ that vou
have been a victim of this mishap.

We notice that in the case oI InIinitive and that`clauses the
preposition is deleted (i.e. annihilated phonologically)

5.2. Exclusively Modifying Adjectives
The subcategory includes items placed in SpeciIier to the head
Noun position and never occur aIter copulative verbs. It is the case oI
the items: utter, sheer, main, actual, favorite, former, more, sole,
principal, chief, prime, eventual:
(82)
a. the main idea, but never *The idea is main
b. the former situation, but never *The situation is former
c .the actual result, but never *The aspect is actual

We might establish a relationship between these items and their
adverbial correlatives, as proved by the synonymous strings:
(83)
a. This is mainly the idea.
b. This is the main idea.
It appears that the adjective has been reduced Irom a corresponding
Adverbial ModiIier.

118
5.3. Syntactically Regular Adjectives with Distinct Meanings
The Iexicon inIorms the student that quite a Iew adjectives may
appear in both positions, but with distinct meanings. In other words
they are syntactically regular, i.e. they have a twoIold distribution, but
each oI the two positions is specialized semantically.
Consider the uses and meanings oI adjectives like heavv, hara, slow,
frequent, traaitional, occasional, possible, apparent a.s.o., which may
appear in both types oI contexts illustrated by the three pairs oI
examples below:
(84)
a. His advance was slow.
Pred A
a slow advance
A N
b. His child acts slowlv.
V Av
(His child is) a slow child.
A N


c. Storms are frequent here.
Pred A
frequent storms
A N
d. He calls on us frequentlv.
V Av
(His is) a frequent caller.
A N


e. The box was heavv.
Pred A
The heavv box
I. She smokea heavilv.
V Av
She was a heavv smoker.
A N

Notice that the nouns caller and smoker are derived Irom the verbs
predicating the source sentence. The second sentence in each pair
expresses an activity and the manner in which it takes place. It is this
manner aaverbial that yields the derived use oI the adjectives
corresponding to the adverb in each sentence.

5.4. The Subcategory of Pseudo-Adjectives
The so-called pseudo-adjectives have a complex status. They
may be: a) both preaicative and moaifving when used with their
primary meaning; b) only modiIying when used with a derived
meaning:

119
(85)
a. She gave me a very civil answer / Her answer was very civil.
b. He specializes in civil engineering. / *The engineering is
civil.

Similarly, there occur Adjectives like criminal in criminal coae / law /
lawver / offenaer, aramatic in aramatic work / criticism /
performance, atomic in atomic science / scientist / institute, chemical
in chemical engineer/specialist, which can be traced back to a nominal
source. This is in each case the label oI the domain oI interest,
respectively crime, arama, atom, chemistrv. The adjectives related to
and speciIying this domain cannot be used predicatively.

5.5. The Inherent versus the Non-Inherent Use
A special comment deserve adjectives like ola, new, wrong,
a.s.o. which may be used inherentlv, i.e. characterizing the reIerent oI
the noun directly, as in: ola / new Iurniture; the wrong answer, or
indirectly (non-inherently), as in: an ola / new acquaintance, the
wrong person. The second use exclusively occurs in modiIying
structures, while the predicative conIiguration only conveys the
inherent meaning:
(86)
a. the ola building The building is ola
b. my ola acquaintance = My acquaintance is ola

We notice a diIIerence between the inherent meaning allowing the
regular syntax (distribution) oI the adjective and the derived`
meaning which allows the modiIying use oI old` which could be
paraphrased by an acquaintance oI old.
Prea A / Moa As which are used inherently are called central as
against the ones, less numerous, which may be used non-inherently
and are, thereIore, called peripheral (commonly occurring only as
Moa As).
Ongoing to the same subcategory are true, complete, perfect, sure,
clear, firm, sheer and total. When used non-inherently they occur as
ModiIiers indicating the degree/extent to which the respective person
is characterized by the property designated by the noun: a true scholar,
the real manager, a complete Iool, a total Iailure, the simple truth, an
outright lie, plain nonsense, a aefinite loss.
120

6. Further Description of Aominal Predicatives
In what Iollows we shall discuss in more detail the attributive
and equative types, expressed by BE Prea NP.
The attributive nominal predicate is generally realized, as we have
seen, by |- deIinite| NPs Iunctioning as Predicatives which assign
properties or attributes to the Subject NP.
Within the Iirst subtype class membership, the determination
Ieatures Ior the NPs Iunctioning as Predicatives are:
(87)
a. Jim is a sophomore./ A sophomore is a secona-vear stuaent.
|sg|, |-deI| NP |sg|, |-deI| NP
b. Sophomores are secona-vear stuaents.
|-sg|, |zero Art| NP

It is noticeable that there is number agreement between the Subject
and the Predicative. Here is the D-Structure representation oI these
conIigurations:
(88)
VP

Spec V`

V SC


be NP
1
NP
2

sophomores second-year students



The Subject oI the Small Clause occurring as Complement oI BE
NP
1
is raised in Spec-VP position whereIrom it will move to Spec-IP
canonical Subject position. It will leave a coindexed trace in its initial
position. The Predicative expressed by NP
2
remains under the SC
node.
The same representation holds true Ior the class-inclusion subtype,
which is exclusively realized by Predicative NPs designating sets oI
entities that include the smaller sets denoted by the Subject NP:

121
(89)
a. A/The sophomore is an undergraduate.
b. Sophomores are undergraduates.

The predicative NP is either a |sg|, |- deI| NP Iunctioning as a
generic label Ior the larger set, or a |- sg|, |zero Art| NP with a generic
plural semantic value. The Subject NP triggers agreement with the
Predicative NP. When singular, this Subject can take either a deIinite
or an indeIinite Determiner (Article).
Nominal Predicatives may also be realized by Iixed, quasi-
idiomatic phrases that take complement clauses as Subjects. These
phrases include indeIinite NPs like: a shame, a pitv, no wonaer, no
aoubt etc., all oI which select a clausal Subject anticipated by the
surIace subject IT:
(90)
It is a shame[that she shoula abuse her parents{.

Another realization oI this attributive type is by means oI an
Aafective-like Noun, determined by the zero article:
(91)
a. He was scounarel enough to lie to you.
b. Henry was more hero than knave.
c. He was fool enough to believe her.

The similarity between nouns and adjectives is conIirmed by their
graaabilitv (more hero, scoundrel enough are NPs containing
QuantiIying Ps oI the kind occurring in APs).
As we are going to see Iurther down a great number oI zero article
NPs occur in this position at the level oI surIace structure as a result oI
Preposition and Article Deletion:
(92)
The worker was of the left wing o PrepArtDel
oThe worker was left wing.

There are very rare cases in which aefinite NPs Iunction as
Predicatives with an attributive Iunction. In general these are just
surface structure expressions oI an indeIinite deep structure noun
phrase. Take Ior instance:


122
(93)
Minis are the thing today.

in which the thing is derivable by means oI deletion and deIinitization
Irom a thing, which thing is in fashion / the most fashionable.

6.1. The Equative Nominal Type
Equative Copulative Preaicates are almost exclusively realized
by NPs that reIer uniquely to one entity to which they assign an
identity related to name, social position, job etc.). That is why
determination oI the respective identiIying NP has to be |deIinite|.
This Ieature also characterizes the Subject NP. We also know that
these predicates are symmetric, thus allowing reversibility oI the two
terms: Subject and Predicative:
(94)
a. Daniel is the winner.
b. The winner is Daniel.

The D-Structure representation is the same as the one oI the
attributive type, with the major diIIerence that either NP1 or NP2 can
raise in SpeciIier (Subject) position:
(95)

VP

Spec
i
V`

V SC


be NP1 NP2
i

Daniel the winner

Both the Subject and the Predicative are deIinite NPs or zero Article
NPs with unique reIerence. The latter include Proper Names or NPs
denoting unique jobs/positions.
Strange as it may appear, indeIinite NPs may also occur
(rather inIrequently) as Predicatives in equative conIigurations. This
happens in case the Subject NP is a reIerent that requires a unique
123
speciIication by means oI the Predicative a Predicative oI this kind.
Take, Ior instance:
(96)
a. The composers goal was an/ the Oscar for film music.
b. The onlv solution is an/ the upaating of all the files.

The NP Iunctioning as Predicative allows an alternation between a
deIinite and an indeIinite NP. Reversibility is possible in both cases.

6.2. Number Agreement between the Subject and the Predicative
The number Ieature oI the two NPs Iorming the Small Clause
in the two types oI Nominal Predicates discussed above is in most
cases shared by the Subject and the Predicative. We may say that
Agreement in number does apply in the context oI Small Clauses, as
proved by the surIace conIigurations below:
(97)
a. S
g
` S
g

- attributive tvpe:

(i) class-membership: The painting was a still life.
(ii) class-inclusion: A/The pineapple is a fruit.
- equative tvpe: The manager was Tom Crow.

b. P1 P1
- attributive tvpe:

(i) class-membership The teachers were verv experiencea.
(ii) class-inclusion:

All teachers are graauates.

However, we can encounter rare cases oI distinct number marking oI
the two NPs, i.e. cases in which number Agreement does not apply:
(98)
a. Sg Subfect P1 Preaicative
Mv favourite area was the highlanas.
Sg P1


124
b.Pl Subfect Sg Preaicative
Waterfalls are an appropriate setting for photographers.
P1 Sg

We notice that the plural entity expressed by the Subject is interpreted
as a singular by the speciIying Predicative.

7. Prepositional Phrases as Predicatives
Prepositional NPs Irequently occur as Predicatives in the attributive
type oI predication. The most widespread combinations are those in
which the Preposition is of possession or appurtenance. We shall
distinguish between the of NPs which never delete the Preposition
and those which may undergo Prep Deletion.

7.1. Predicatives with Undeletable Preposition
Prepositional Phrases marked by oI` are relatively Irozen. The ones
below, Ior instance, never allow deletion oI the governing preposition:
(99)
a. The writer was of a humble origin.
b. The debate is of a great importance.
c. The two ministers are of the same opinion.

Prepositional NPs with other governing prepositions are also quasi-
idiomatic. The meaning oI the preposition is oIten Iigurative, having a
metaphorical tinge. Here is a list oI Iixed prepositional phrases which
are Irequently used in Predicative position:
(100)
to be above reproach, at attention/ a aeaa ena/a halt/ great
pains, to be before ones time, behina the bars, beneath ones aignitv,
besiae the point, bevona reaemption etc.

What Iollows is a list oI the quite Irequent combinations oI be in
NP, which are in general descriptive oI a state or conaition. Most oI
these are set phrases or idioms, which have either a literal,
nonIigurative meaning, or a Iigurative, metaphorical meaning:
(101)
to be in action, in being / existence, in blossom / flower, in
bua / leaf, in clover, in aespair, in emplovment / work, in
fashion / vogue, in focus, in force, in hana, in feoparav, in a
125
mess, in neea, in the open, in oraers, in penurv, in the picture,
in plav, in smb.s possession.
Here are other PPs that may occur in the Predicative position, as
illustrated by the Iollowing contexts with the preposition on:
(102)
a. The drinks were on the house.
b. I am on mv feet all the time.

The Iact that BE can be either a meaningIul existential verb or a
copula Iollowed by a prepositional phrase may produce ambiguous
strings (iI out oI context), such as to be at home which may either
have the literal meaning when be is existential or the Iigurative
meaning to be conversant (with a subject), in which case at home
Iunctions as Predicative aIter copulative BE. Similarly, to sit at the
table and the closely similar sit at table.
To conclude, the Nominal Predicate expressed by BE ` PP is
quite well represented in English, particularly in the idiomatic area oI
the Iexicon. BE is comparable to verbs like get or give which have a
wide range oI combinations with prepositions. Thus BE appears as a
quite rich intransitive prepositional verb.
The above mentioned nominal conIigurations should also be
compared to two closely kindred, yet distinct constructions:
(1) The complex/phrasal verb BE consisting oI BE ^ Av Particle, e.g.
(103)
to be about/arouna, be aheaa, be along, be (will) awav, be back,
be behina, be aown, be in, be insiae, be off, be on, be out, be over,
be up.

In most oI these cases, BE is a meaningIul verb and the Particle has its
own locative or temporal meaning.

(2) The complex verb BE combined with two items: BE ^ Prt ^ PP:
(104)
to be abreast of smth., be along to, be aown for/from/in/on/to/with,
be in for/on/with, be on about/at/in/into/to, be out at/for/in/with (it),
be rouna at, be up against/for/to.

7.2. Predicatives with Deletable Preposition
A whole group including of NPs which indicate attributes
reIerring to color, si:e, age, qualitv, shape or with the appurtenance oI
126
an entity to a style, trend, social group etc., may undergo Prep
Deletion, thus resulting in :ero article NP Preaicatives. Here are some
illustrations oI surIace structures that may occur with or without oI`:
(105)
a. These trousers are (of) the right si:e.
b. Her scarI is (of) the same color as mine.
c. My hair is (of) the same length (as yours)
d. She is (of) the same age (as my sister).
e. Those mountains are (of) about the same height.
I. These pieces oI luggage are (of) the same weight.

The Preaicative NPs above are all determined by deIinite articles and
Post-Determiners (same, right) or Quantifiers (about). IndeIinite NPs
may also occur in this position (more seldom, though), e.g.:
(106)
Her hair is (of) a copper shaae.

The deletion oI the preposition may be coupled with that oI the article,
the result being a :ero-article NP in surIace structure. Such reduced
NPs resemble Adjectival Phrases used attributively:
(107)
Prep and Art

Her ancestors were of the Church
of Englana.
Her ancestors were
Church of Englana.

The Cathedral is of the sixteenth
centurv.
The Cathedral is sixteenth
centurv.
My uncle is of the right wing. My uncle is right wing.
This painting is oI / by Jan Gogh at
his best.
This painting is Jan Gogh
at his best.


8. Reciprocal Copulative Predicates
A distinct subclass oI copulative predicates specialized
semantically Ior expressing properties that characterize inter-related
entities is labelled as reciprocal`:


127
(108)
a. Mathematics is similar to logic./ Logic is similar to
mathematics.
b. Mathematics ana logic are similar (to each other).

Syntactically, there are two patterns used alternatively to
express reciprocity. The Iirst conIiguration compares two |singular|
entities, the Iirst one being expressed by the Subject, the second one
by a Prepositional Object. The two terms can be reverted, hence this
construction belongs to the already known type oI symmetric
predicates.
The second example above has a |set| Subject NP that
indicates the inter-related entities. The reciprocal predicate is
consequently a plural one (agreement being marked on the copula).
The predicative adjective has a Iixed preposition which takes as
complement a pronominal phrase specialized Ior the reciprocal
relation (each other or one another).
Actually, reciprocal predicates represent a semantic class
realized syntactically not only by copulative structures. The Iexicon
includes intransitive and transitive reciprocal verb subcategories, such
as confer, agree, aiffer, combine, mix( intransitives) and resemble and
marrv (transitives). Compare the copulative predicate in (107)-a to the
synonymous intransitive predicate in the second sentence:
(109)
a. Mathematics is aifferent from biologv.
b. Mathematics aiffers from biologv.

An analogous case is presented below:
(110)
a. Mathematics is similar to logic.
b. Mathematics resembles logic.

This time synonymy holds between the copulative predicate and its
transitive synonym.

8.1. Subcategorization of Reciprocal Predicative Adjectives
Reciprocal Predicative Adjectives Iurther subcategorize as to
the meaning and prepositional governor oI their Reciprocal Object.
Thus, the Iollowing three sub-types result:
128
(a) Prea As that indicate a positive reciprocal relationship and co-
occur with the Prep to. The class includes attachea, engagea, close,
equal, foint, marriea:
(111)
a. Mike is marriea to Ann.
b. The application is attachea to the letter.

(b) Prea As that indicate a positive or neutral reciprocal relationship and
take the Prep with or with/to. Among them there are equivalent (with),
iaentical (with), correlatea (with/to), kinarea (with) etc.
(112)
a. Henry`s answer is iaentical with mine.
b. Transitivity is correlatea with passivi:ation.

(c) Prea As that indicate dissimilarity or other negative reciprocal
relation, all oI which take the Prep from, e.g.; aifferent, aistinct, far,
separatea, isolatea, aetachea, aloof, etc.
(113)
a. Cluj is far from Bucharest.
b. Pete is aloof from his mates.

Predicate adjectives which do not have the inherent |reciprocal|
Ieature may acquire, contextuallv, a reciprocal meaning. Compare:
(114)
a. Sam and Jean are frienalv.
b. Sam and Jean are frienalv to each other.

Sentence (114)-a is ambiguous between the non-reciprocal and the
reciprocal meanings. The second sentence clearly has a reciprocal
meaning, owing to the presence oI the reciprocal pronominal phrase.

8.2. More Complex Predicative Structures: the Predicative
Adjunct to the Subject
The Iunction oI Preaicative Aafunct (labelled alternatively in
the literature as Subfect Complement or Obfect Complement) occurs in
non-copulative conIiguration, be they transitive or intransitive. The
Predicative is part oI a Small Clause, whereIrom the Subject NP raises
to surIace Subject or to surIace Object, while the Predicative is
retained` as a secondary predication:

129
(115)
a. |e| boiled |the eggs, hara|
V NP (Pat) AP(Result) ------Small Clause
o The eggs boiled | t , hara|
Raised Su V Predicative Adjunct to the Subject

The trace oI the moved NP with the role oI Patient is leIt
behind within the Small Clause. Further examples in which the
Predicative Adjunct is part oI an intransitive conIiguration:
(116)
a. The door banged shut. (AP)
b. The moon rose bright. (AP)
c. The door slid open. (AP)
d. The glass broke into pieces.(PP)

Such Adjuncts express results by means oI APs or PPs and they occur
mostly with telic unaccusatives derived Irom causative transitives.
The description oI Predicative Adjuncts derived Irom Small Clauses
taken as Complements oI transitives is to be Iound in the section
devoted to Complex Transitive Predications.

9. Composite Predicates with :Prop` Jerbs
and :Aon-Contrastive Objects`
We have distinguished in the introduction to this chapter a
subtype oI predicates which are realized by means oI several items,
representing a subtype oI lexicallv complex verbs, headed by the
so-called prop` verbs. Consider the phrases below constructed round
the most Irequent prop` verbs have, take and make, to which we
could add get, ao, pav ana give:
(117)
have a rest / a swim / a lie aown etc.
take a walk/ an aim/ legal action etc.
make a change / a copv / a aemana / a aiscoverv / an excuse /
a guess / a request etc..

can be substituted by one lexical item, but evince an internal
transitive constituencv. Thus, the verbal item is relatively light Irom a
semantic point oI view, but it still behaves as a verb. Morphologically,
it behaves as a lexical verb; unlike BE it takes DO-Support. It also
takes auxiliaries or inIlections to mark Mood, Tense and Aspect:
130
(118)
a. The two old men were taking a walk. ( were walking)
b. Marian will have a rest. ( will rest)

Syntactically, the prop` verb is either a monotransitive verb or a
ditransitive one (like the dative verbs give and pav). Each prop` verb l
takes a Direct Objects which play the part oI carriers oI the predicate
meaning, oIten being a nominali:ation oI the corresponding verbal
equivalent. Here are Iurther examples with the dative prop` verbs:
(119)
a. Tom gave Helen a kiss ( kissed Helen)
b. We paia our tutor a visit. ( visited our tutor)

The phrases above are structured as ditransitives, while their simpler
equivalents are monotransitive. With prop` verbs like have and take
the internal organization oI the respective predicating phrase is
monotransitive, while the corresponding equivalents are intransitive
(see examples in (116). There are, however, Irequent cases in which
the DO is a non-derived noun as in:
(120)
take aavantage (oI smth.)
pav homage (to smb.)
keep tabs (on smb.)

These Objects are similar to the ones expressed by derived nominals:
they all have a smaller degree oI Objecthood than genuine Direct
Objects. This means that they do not have all the properties oI
regular` Dos. Thus, while the letter may be questioned, the Iormer
evince a strong resistance to questioning:
(121)
a. 1. He took a walk in the park.
2. What did he take in the park? * A walk.
b. 1. She took great advantage oI her promotion.
2. What did she take oI her promotion? * Great advantage.

Compare the examples above to:
(122)
a. 1. He took the pupils to the zoo.
2. Whom did he take to the zoo? The pupils.
b. 1. She took the kniIe Irom the drawer.
131
2. What did she take Irom the drawer? A kniIe.

II we try coordination oI such a non-contrastive` DO with a
contrastive` (regular) one, we are likely to obtain ungrammatical
sequences:
(123)
a. * Jim took advantage and some money out oI his pocket.
b. * I paid the rent and homage to the landlady.

Pronominali:ation oI this quasi-object noun is also
impossible:
(124)
a. He took the pupils / them to the zoo.
b. Jim took aavantage / *it oI the grant.

With respect to passivi:ation most oI these quasi-object
occurrences disallow the Iormation oI a passive counterpart. There
are, however, some cases in which the passivization does apply. They
seem to be conditioned by the presence oI a Noun ModiIier within the
structure oI the NP taken as DO oI the prop` verb:
(125)
a. Sheila took great aavantage oI the scholarship.
b. Great aavantage was taken (by Sheila) oI her scholarship.
c. The scholarship was taken great advantage oI (by Sheila).

This type oI predication seems to have a great potential Ior
passivization, since it actually yields two passives: one targeting the
DO Ior movement to Subject in S-Structure, the other one promoting`
the Object oI the Preposition in the respective position.
We have limited our approach oI such composite` predications
to a description oI the main subtypes and oI their syntactic behavior.
We have not yet Iound a convenient way to represent such structures,
partly owing to their marked idiosyncrasies. The lexical entry to each
phrasal pattern based on a light prop` verb should speciIy its peculiarities
as to its global semantic interpretation, passivization a.s.o. Besides,
the student will have to diIIerentiate between those patterns that based
on transitivity, but behave as intransitives (usually oI the unergative
subtype) and those that may select Complements (Direct, Indirect or
Prepositional Objects in Complement position).

132


IV. COMPLEX INTRANSITIVE PREDICATIONS




1. Lexically Complex versus Syntactically Complex
Complexity is a property oI verbal predications which can be
maniIested at two levels: a) lexical, i.e. at the level oI word structure;
and b) svntactic, i.e. at the level oI the combinatorial valencies` oI the
verb, with Iocus on its possibility oI intransitives to select one
Complement, and oI transitive verbs to select two Complements (e.g.
the Double Object` construction). Both intransitive and transitive
verbs include subcategories that are characterized by lexical
complexitv (e.g. come along/in, get arouna/on, set out/forth/in
intransitive; put on |a coat|, switch on / off |the lights| / transitive)
Syntactically, there a complex conIigurations headed by an
intransitive verb with an Indirect or a Prepositional Object or with two
such Oblique/ Prepositional Objects, governed jointly by the Verb and
by the Preposition. In a similar way, the Iexicon includes transitive
verbs with Double Object, dative verbs with a Direct and an Indirect
Object etc. Chapters apart are devoted to each oI these complex
subcategories.

1.1. Lexically Complex Intransitives. The Problem of the Particle
The big subcategory oI Complex or Phrasal Intransitives is
made up oI verbal heads which are Iollowed in S-Structure by one or
two items:
(1)
a. Particle (Prt): The situation is looking up again.
b. Preposition (P) : Mother is looking after her younger son.
c. Particle ana Preposition: We are looking forward to
meeting you in the summer.

The major syntactic diIIerence between the Particle and the
Preposition regards government: Prepositions are Governors, hence
they assign case, while Particles Iail to do it. It has been suggested,
however, that Particles occur in the D-Structure as heads oI Particle
133
Phrases, where Irom they move to Iorm a unit with the V head, which
comes to incorporate them. Consider the Iollowing structures:
(2)
a. John turnea rouna the corner. (V ` Prep ` NP)
b. John turnea rouna the sentence/ turnea the sentence/it
rouna.(V ` Prt ` NP / V ` NP/Pro/N ` Prt)
c. John turnea rouna ( V ` Prt )

In the Iirst sentence turn is an intransitive Iollowed by a PP
governed by the Preposition round and Iunctioning as Adverbial oI
Direction. In (2)-b, which is apparently similar, the verb is transitive,
it incorporates a Particle (homophonous with the Preposition) and the
alternative pattern: V ` NP/Pro/N ` Prt is optional Ior the NP Object
and obligatory Ior the pronominal one. In the third case the verb-
particle combination occurs as an intransitive predicate with no
Complement. The meaning interpretation oI the intransitive is totally
distinct Irom that oI the transitive verb. We can consider that structure
(2)-a and -b are to a certain extent similar:
(3)
a. VP


Spec V`

V PP

turn P NP
round the corner

b. VP

Spec V`

V Prt P
turn Prt NP
round the sentence


The structure headed by the transitive verb may be given two
explanations: we can either consider that government is blocked by
134
the Particle, so the latter has to move by the verb and become
incorporated in a J+Prt unit with governing properties, or we can
move the NP the sentence to the leIt where it can be properly
governed and assigned case, Iorming the conIiguration: J ^ AP/Pro/A
^ Prt.
In present-day descriptions oI such transitive structures Iour
approaches co-exist: 1. the one that considers the VPrt as basic;
2. the one that considers V Prt as derived by Particle incorporation;
3. the one that takes as basic the V ` NP ` Prt; 4. the one that
considers it as being derived by NP movement. There are arguments
to support each oI the Iour variants. Depending on which we opt Ior,
there will result a correlated explanation and description oI the simpler
intransitive structure illustrated by (2)-c. Thus the Particle may be
hypothetically considered to derive Irom a Preposition that takes no
Complement, but this explanation holds only in those cases in which
the Particle and the Preposition are homophones (e.g. in, up, around,
down). We shall adopt the point oI view according to which the
PrtPhrase has an empty Complement. This means that the Particle oI
intransitive Complex Verbs can be directly incorporated so as to Iorm
VPrt combinations.
(4)

VP

Spec V`

V Prt P
turn Prt NP
round |e|


VP

Spec V`

V* Prt P

V Prt Prt NP
turn round t |e|

135
These might be the D- Structure and S-structure representations oI the
respective verbs.

1.2. Typology of Intransitive Complex Verbs according to the
Semantic Criterion
The meaning contribution oI the Particle may be said to Iorm scale,
having at one end the maximal contribution oI locative and directional
particles, in the middle the meaning contribution oI aspectual particles
and oI other combinations in which the particle is used metaphorically
/Iiguratively and at the other end combinations in which the semantic
role oI the particle is null.

1.2.1. Complex Jerbs with Locative or Directional Particles
The Particles with the strongest meaning are the Locative and
Directional ones. They preserve a relatively high degree oI
independence Irom the verb(s) they combine with. The meaning oI the
combination results Irom the joined contribution oI the two items as
shown by:
(5)
a. The engine was :ooming across.
b. The commander stumpea awav.
c. A squadron oI jet Iighters flew past.
d. The pilot took off smoothly.
e. The snow came aown thick and Iast.
I. The boy walkea out in tearless grieI.

In most oI the examples above the Particle contributes with its literal
meaning. As expected the verbs indicate motion, while the particle
speciIies its direction. Iocation is taken by positional verbs:
(6)
a. The workers are sitting in today.
b. They will walk out tomorrow.

The meaning oI sit in and walk out is lightly altered, however: besides
the positional sense, there is an additional tinge indicating an activity
undertaken as a sign oI protest ( a strike, a demonstration).
Frequent metaphorical transIers occur quite with Vs that
combine with up and aown:
(7)
a. The prices have gone up oI late.
136
b. The temperature will probably go down.
c. Everything is going up these days: coal, groceries, bus Iares.

The number oI contexts in which combinations with such non-
literal meanings can occur is more limited, their ideomaticity is high
enough. Particles like along, awav, back, bv, aown, forth, forwara, in,
off, on, out, past, rouna, through, unaer, up, a.s.o. evince a whole
scale oI meaning values, Irom very concrete ones, when they combine
with verbs oI motion, to very abstract ones, in quite diversiIied
combinations with most oI the basic verbs oI English.
An interesting phenomenon is also observable. The addition
oI a particle causes in many cases the syntactic recategorization oI the
verb. Verbs like get, grow, set are basically transitive, but the complex
verbs based on combinations with particles are both transitive and
intransitive. We reIer here to verbs like get along /arouna/ up, grow
up, set in/out a.s.o. The Iexicon has to speciIy such instances oI shiIt
Irom one basic subcategory to another one.

1.2.2. Aspectual Complex Jerbs
English has specialized a set oI aspectual particles which
signal to the aspectual dimension oI the event. These represent
somewhat more abstract uses oI the respective particles. The Iirst is
that oI ingressive particles which indicate the initial/incipient aspect oI
an event:
(8)
a. We set forth on the last stage oI our climb.
b. They set out to win support Ior their scheme.
c. A hostile reaction has set in.
d. The cars set off in a cloud oI dust.
e. The reporters set out in high spirits.

The aurative aspect is rendered by on and awav, which are specialized
Ior indicating the continuation oI the event. Most verbs combine Ireely
with on (intransitives like speak, walk etc. on; objectless transitives:
eat/reaa on etc.). Awav is more limited contextually:
(9)
a. He walkea on in the teeth oI the strong wind.
b. She was working awav.
c. The old man muttering / grumbling awav.
d. The soldiers blazed awav, until no ammunition was leIt.
137

The terminative/egressive aspect is rendered by combinations with
out, awav, through, off and up:
(10)
a. This custom has aiea out.
b. High-heel shoes have gone out.
c. He passea away quietly at midnight.

One and the same particle may be used ingressively or egressively, in
two diIIerent contexts. Consider up in:
(11)
a. He is just getting up (ingressive).
b. This morning I got up early (terminative).

The same Prt up, may be used to indicate intensification oI an
action:
(12)
a. They are warming up beIore the race.
b. There's plenty Ior everyone - So, eat up!
c. We must clean up aIter the party's over.
d. Cheer up!

The verbs eat and clean in the contexts above occur as recategorized
transitives, i.e. intransitives derived by deletion oI the D-structure
Direct Object.
Iast but not least, the contribution oI the Prt to the global
meaning oI the Complex Verb may be null, which happens in a great
number oI cases. The verb itselI can have a weakened meaning, one that
is quite remote Irom its primarv meaning. Take, Ior instance: to come
rouna ( regain consciousness), ao up ( Iasten), give in ( yield), get
along ( manage), get bv ( survive), turn up ( appear) a.s.o.

1.3. Syntactic Features of Intransitives with Particle
We shall supply below more details concerning the syntactic
behavior oI such combinations. The respective verbs can be modiIied
by adverbial intensifiers such as right and straight in contexts
where the Prt has a Iocative or Directional meaning:
(13)
a. The electricity supply went straight off at 2.30 p.m.
b. The taxes came right down beIore the elections.
138
c. The naughty kids rushed right inside.

The meaning oI some motion verbs can be reinIorced optionally by
almost redundant particles that simply reiterate the basic meaning oI
the verb. Take to climb (up), to flv (up), to go (awav), a.s.o.
Nominali:ation oI these verbs results in hyphenated
compounds such as break-in, make-up, sit-in, take-off or in Iully
linked Iorms such as flv past, splashaown. The stress in pronunciation
is on the verbal element (break-in). Nominalized Iorms oI the type
discussed above commonly occur in two possible S patterns:
a) a transitive S conIiguration predicated by a generic activity verbs
(ao, stage, make, take and the light prop` verb have), Iollowed by a
nominalized Iorm Iunctioning as non-contrastive Direct Object:
(14)
a. A gang oI thieves aia a break-in last night.
b. The workers are staging a sit-in.
c. The pilot maae a smooth take-off.
d. The runners are having a quick warm-up beIore the race.

Notice the Iact that the nominalized Iorm is determined by an
indeIinite article and can be modiIied by Adjectives. The Adjective
corresponds to the Adverb in the basic pattern.
b) an existential BE Sentence in which the nominalized Iorm Iunctions
as deep Subject, the surIace Subject being the expletive THERE:
(15)
a. There was a break-in last night.
b. There was a sit-in (by the workers)
c. There was a take-oII at the new airport.
d. There was a warm-up beIore the race.

We can easily notice that, despite the synonymy oI structures a) and b)
the Iormer is more avnamic, the latter more static. In a larger
Discourse context they will not be, thereIore, inter-changeable.
Emphatic preposing oI the particle is a stylistic movement
which can only apply when the Prt does not Iorm an idiom with the
verb which is the case oI motion verbs that take Directional particles
Emphasis on the Prt is obtained by topicalization oI the Prt and
movement of the Subfect NP in post-verbal position (Iull Subject
Verb inversion:
139
(16)
a. The prices came aown Down came the prices.
b. Off came the old lady`s wig.
c. Awav Ilew the red scarI.

Two movements are necessary to produce such conIigurations:
movement oI the verb and oI the particle to initial IP position (in
Spec), both leaving behind traces signaling the D-structure slots.

1.4. The Subcategory of Inherent Reflexives
Another class oI simple intransitives which evince lexical
complexitv includes intransitive verbs which are inherentlv reflexive.
By this we mean combinations such as absent oneself, bestir oneself,
perfure oneself a.s.o. The verbal item couples with a
meaningless/dummy reflexive pronoun which is speciIied as an
inherent Ieature oI the respective V in the Iexicon.
(17)
a. The youngster conauctea himself well while abroad.
b. You should not absent vourself Irom the MA programme.
c. The hero betook himself to the woods.

We notice that these verbs denote behavior or motion which
are rarely used in colloquial English. They occur in Iormal or literary
registers. The verbs Iorm together with the reIlexives a lexically
complex predicate. They diIIer Irom constructions with meaningIul
ReIlexive Objects, be they Direct, Indirect or Prepositional:
(18)
a. Diana admired herself. (transitive with ReIl DO)
b. Diana used to talk to herself. (dative intransitive, ReIl. IO)
c. Diana talked to George about herself.

These objects are selected alongside non-coreIerential NPs by the
respective V subcategories, according to their c-selection and
s-selection requirements. The inherent reIlexive has no syntactic
Iunction, it occurs as an obligatory item Ior the primary use oI the
verb.
The properties that are shared, though, by all reIlexive
pronouns, beyond the important diIIerences in point oI status and use
that we have shown above, are connected with their occurrence as
items bound to antecedents with which they are coreIerential. The
140
antecedent is always placed within the local domain oI the reIlexive,
which is that oI a Iinite S/IP. The antecedent has to c-command the
reIlexive with which it shares the Ieatures oI number and gender. This
agreement` or concord` applies as well upon the reIlexive item that
goes with the verbs above.
ReIlexive verbs can also take an obligatory preposition, which, in its
turn govern an object:
(19)
a. The student availea themselves of everv opportunitv to
practice their new skills.
b. He acquaintea himself with the conventions oI the
institution.

These reIlexives are syntactically complex, being Iollowed
obligatorily by a Prepositional Object in Complement position.

2. Intransitives with Prepositional Object
Prepositional intransitives are complex Irom a lexical and
syntactic point oI view. They do resemble particles by their idiosyncratic
occurrence and by the Iact that they evince a high degree oI iaiomaticitv
when they participate in the Iormation oI certain PPs. But, unlike
particles, prepositions are governors, hence case-assigners. Being
idiosyncratic these items have to be indicated in the Iexicon as
obligatory Ieatures oI the verbs they co-occur with.
Prepositional intransitives take indirect internal arguments
which are assigned case by the preposition (by virtue oI government).
As concerns the meaning contribution oI the prepositions that
go with intransitives, the situation is similar to that oI particles. They
can also be said to Iorm a scale. A tone end we Iind directional and
locative prepositions with a concrete meaning or with a
Iigurative/metaphorical one. Compare the members oI each pair:
(20)
a. 1. The thieI broke into Marian`s flat at midnight.
2. You should look into the matter more careIully.
b. 1. My elbows rested (up)on the wooden desk.
2. Tom`s Iuture rests (up)on this decision.
c. 1. The child has fallen into the ditch.
2. My Iormer boss has fallen into disrepute.

141
The Iact that the preposition Iorms a Phrase with the NP it governs is
proved by the possible insertion oI an Adjunct (e.g. a Manner
Adverbial in between the verb and the Prepositional Phrase:
(21)
a. The board will go verv carefullv into the proposals.
b. I ran brieflv through the main points oI the new law.
c. We talked frequentlv about corruption.
d. She agreed entirelv on the steps to be taken.

The preposition can be modiIied by Adverbials such as right
and straight:
(22)
a. Jack dashed right into the corridor.
b. He was looking straight at the Iierce animal.

The syntactic Ieatures above prove that in the active sentence
predicated by prepositional verbs the Prepositional Phrase behaves as
a Iused syntactic unit. This Iusion comes to be destroyed once we
apply passivization to some oI the sentences in (21) and (22):
(23)
a. Corruption was (Irequently) talkea about.
b. The steps were (entirely) agreea on.
c. The Iierce animal was being lookea at.

The passive sentences above prove that despite their
intransitivity, the respective verbs allow passivization, which is an
uncommon phenomenon. In the passive variants the preposition
Iuses` with the verb, while the NP Object oI the preposition moves
to Subject.

2.1. Passivization of Prepositional Intransitives.
Preposition Stranding
Our hypothesis that the preposition merges with the
passivized verb is conIirmed by the ungrammatical sentence below:
(24)
*The Iierce animal was being looked straight at.

The passive predicate no longer allows the Adverbial to
modiIy the preposition; it cannot be inserted in between the participle
oI the verb and the preposition. We may consider that in such cases
142
the preposition is similar to the adverbial particle: it comes to be
incorporated into the V, Iorming a unit by adjoining to it. The
consequence is that the Prepositional Phrase is split: the NP
Iunctioning as deep object in the active moves to Subject, thus
producing the stranding oI the Preposition. This separation Irom the
Preposition (Preposition Stranding) proves that passivization aIIects
the whole J-Prep unit:
(25)
a. The moderator ran through the final conclusions.
b. 1he final conclusions were run through by the moderator.

By Passivi:ation the Object oI the Preposition the final conclusions
moves to the Subject position leIt unoccupied by the external
argument. The Prepositional Phrase has actually been reanalyzed, the
sequence V ` | P ` NP| becoming | V ` P| ` NP (PP Reanalysis)
The process oI Prep incorporation, similar to the one oI Part
incorporation produces similar passive results. Compare:
(26)
a. The words were lookea up in the new dictionary. ( V ` Prt)
b. The gloves were looked Ior in every drawer. ( V ` Prep)

II, however, the Prepositional Object is part oI a complex idiomatic
phrase, passivization is generally blocked.
(27)
a. My Iormer boss has fallen into disrepute.
b. *Disrepute has been fallen into (by my Iormer boss).

Idiomaticity does not always block Passivization. Take Ior instance:
(28)
a. The boss Irequently got at the inIerior clerks.
b. The inIerior clerks were Irequently got at by the boss.

There is a group oI longer idiomatic prepositional phrases, whose
structure is V ` idiomatic prepositional object ` prepositional object:
to get to the bottom of smth., to get to grips with smth.
By passivization it is only the second, non-idiomatic object
that is made into Subject:
(29)
a. 1. We shall get to the bottom of this whole business.
2. This whole business will be got to the bottom of.
143
b. 1. They got to grips with the deficiency in 10 minutes.
2. The deficiency was got to grips with in 10 minutes.

Preposition Stranaing only applies to this second object. The lexicon
has to state this peculiarity oI idiosyncratic idioms based on one or
two Prepositional Phrases.

2.2. Nominalization, Relative Clause Formation and Emphasis
By nominali:ation hyphenated compounds are obtained,
having the internal structure: J Preposition (e.g. a glance-through,
a run-through, a skim- through). The productivity oI this process is
extremely reduced many prepositions never yield such compound
Iorms.
In the Iormation oI relative clauses introduced by a Preposition Object
oI the verb predicating the clause there are two possibilities. The
relativized Prepositional Object appears in initial position in the
context oI Iormal or literary Prepositional Object (usually written)
usage. However, in most cases, especially in everyday inIormal usage
Preposition Stranding applies, the Prep being incorporated in the verb.
Here are some NPs modiIied by relative clauses with V ` PP in the
two registers mentioned above:
(30)
a. A saIe political Iuture on which all liberals reckon.
b. The man upon whom all our hopes rested.
c. The old store which the thieves broke into.
d. A marriage which everybody is talking about.

Emphasis on the Prepositional Object may be obtained by
topicali:ation, yielding constructions like:
(31)
a. For his family he has provided well.
b. Upon this alternative all our hopes rested.

2.3. Intransitives with Particle and Preposition
Iexical complexity reaches a maximal degree in combinations oI the
Iorm: V ` Prt ` Prep, three items that are in a Iixed sequence, the
meaning and syntactic regime oI the whole combination being
diIIerent Irom that oI the V item:
(32)
a. Romania has aone away with this corruption.
144
b. Our Iamily came up against many difficulties.
c. Students are looking forward to the winter holidays.
d. The speaker aiant put up with the noise in the street.
In between the Particle and the Prepositional Object there may be
inserted Adverbs oI Manner:
(33)
a. They did away reluctantlv with corruption.
2. The speaker put up cheerfullv with the noise.

The intensiIying adverbs right and straight (as well as, occasionally,
adverbs oI degree such as completelv, totallv entirelv) may separate
the Verb Irom its Particle, Iollowed by the Prepositional Object:
(34)
a. They did right away with corruption.
b. My Iamily came straight up against difficulties.

Passivi:ation applies as in the case oI prepositional verbs (with Prep
Stranding):
(35)
a. The noise was put up with cheerIully.
b. Corruption has been aone away with reluctantly.

The Iusion between the constituents oI intransitives in this class is
conIirmed by the possibility oI Iorming compounas made up oI the
three items, with the verb in past participle Iorm. Such compounds are
used as Noun ModiIiers:
(36)
a. a much lookea-forwara-to vacation.
b. the badly facea-up-to tasks.
c. these cheerIully put-up-with gestures.

Emphatic topicalization may produce structures like:
(37)
On a low pension my aunt is just scraping along.

In relative clauses with relativized Prep Object the behavior is
identical with that oI simpler prepositional verbs.

145
3. Other Syntactically Complex Intransitives
Complex intransitives are verbs that take one obligatory co-
occurrent phrase Iunctioning as Indirect Object (marked by the
preposition to) or as Prepositional Object (marked by other
preposition than the dative to). They take indirect internal arguments.
Besides there are some Vs that obligatorily select Adverbial Adjuncts
(otherwise occurring as optional constituents). Other complexities
arise in case Small Clauses occur as Complements. OIten reduced to
Predicative Adjunct at the level oI S-Structure.

3.1. Intransitives with a Prepositional Indirect Object
The Iexicon includes a subcategory oI aative intransitives
marked by the obligatory preposition to, governing an Object which is
labelled as Indirect`. This Object usually resists passivization.

3.1.1. The Experiencer Subtvpe
We shall include here verbs that select an Indirect Object theta-
marked Ior the role Experiencer like the Vs oI seeming (seem, appear
to smb.) oI cognition (occur to smb.) and sense perception (souna,
taste). The occurrence oI a dative complement is obligatory with
occur:
(38)
a. That alternative has never occurrea to anyone.
b. The idea oI a change had never occurred to me.
c. It has never occurrea to me that this is a Ialse rumor.
d. * That alternative / the idea / It has never occurred.

Jerbs of seeming also involve cognition so they most
Irequently take the Indirect Object expressing the person who has the
respective cognitive experience:
(39)
a. How does it seem/appear to you?
b. It seemea to me that I was dreaming.

The role related to the Subject is Theme or Patient. The respective
argument moves to Subject to receive case (the nominative)
With verbs oI sense perception the Experiencer usually
remains implicit:

146
(40)
a. This cake tastes Iunny (to me).
b. It sounas rather strange (to me).
Eventive verbs like happen and the archaic item befall take
Dative NPs expressing the Experiencer oI an event. The verb befall
takes an Indirect Object which is prepositionless in surIace structure.
Compare:

(41)
a. What's happenea to your grannie?
b. A great misIortune has befallen my neighbors.

The argument Patient / Theme moves to occupy the Subject position.

3.1.2. The Relational Subtvpe
These Vs indicate relations between all kinds oI entities.
Those specialized Ior inferioritv relations between man and other
entities include bow to smb., accrue to smb., cringe to / before smb.,
aefer to smb. or smth., surrenaer / submit to smb. or smth., to truckle
to smb., viela / succumb to smth. II they reIer to relations between
humans, their selectional restrictions Ior Subject and Indirect Object
are the same |human|. Some oI these Vs may, however, take
inanimate (usually abstract) Indirect Objects:
(42)
a. The young actress bowea to the audience.
b. Our people will never surrenaer to foreign invaders.
c. I shall always aefer to my tutor / to his experience.
d. You should never viela to temptation / to the times.
e. We won`t succumb to persuasion through the media.

There are some relational verbs that express possession: belong and
pertain to smth. or smb. They take to APs as Indirect Objects.
The role theta-marking the corresponding argument is
Benefactive/Possessor. The other role is Theme or Patient:
(43)
a. The Iarm belongs to my brother-in-law.
b. These qualities pertain to youth.
c. * The Farm belongs. * These qualities pertain.

147
The two verbs cannot occur without the Indirect Object as
shown in (43)-c. They are synonymous with the transitive relational
Vs oI possession: have (the prototype), possess and own. Although the
roles oI the arguments are identical, they are grammaticalized in a
diIIerent way. Compare:
(44)
a. The blue coat belongs to Professor Yule.
b. Professor Yule has the blue coat.

We notice that the role oI Possessor (Ben) is Indirect Object with
belong (to) and Subject with the transitive have. Such synonyms
which revert the roles in S-structure are called converses.

3.1.3. The Goal Subtvpe. Passivi:ation Possibilities
There are dative intransitives that co-occur with the typical
role associated with at least one argument in such constructions
(usually in transitive patterns): the Goal or Recipient. Most oI these
Vs take an Agent as external argument, placed in Subject position.
Among these Goal-oriented Vs there are datives expressing
linguistic communication, e.g. apologi:e to smb., speak/ talk to smb.
(a subcategory that has a heavy weight among transitive datives),
some others, like refer to smth., appeal to smb., applv to smb. or smth.,
lecture to smb., agree to smth., are kindred with Vs oI cognition or oI
communication by means oI discourse:
(45)
a. The critic referrea to Fowles as the best living novelist`.
b. You should appeal to the Dean.
c. We shall have to speak to the boss.
d. He will lecture to the third year students.

Some oI these constructions are passivizable;
(46)
a. Fowles was referrea to as the best living novelist`.
b. The boss will have to be spoken to.

Preposition Stranaing is part oI the process in such cases.

3.2. Intransitives with Two Prepositional Objects
A number oI intransitive Vs may be Iollowed by two PPs.
Although the Preposition is relatively Iixed, some oI these
148
Prepositional Objects do not evince the same Iusion with the Verb as
the Vs Iollowed by one PO. Whenever the two POs can occur with
one and the same verb the Iirst one is in Complement position, while
the second one has the Iunction oI Adjunct, as proved by Passivization
possibilities.
One sub-group includes Vs with an Indirect Object marked
by to, Iollowed by a Prepositional Object in which the Prep indicates a
topic (marked by the prepositions about, on or upon) or the cause or
purpose oI an action (marked by for). Here are some examples with
the Iirst subtype:
(47)
a. He lectures to the freshers on the Elizabethan theatre.
IO PO
b. They will talk to Mary`s husband about her success.
c. I'll speak to Daddy about my future career.

Passivi:ation may be targeted on one oI these objects, the
absence oI the other one being obligatory:
(48)
a. Mary`s husband will be talkea to. * about her success.
b. Your tutor will have to be spoken to.
c. Mary`s success was never spoken about in public.*to her
husband.

Here are illustrations oI the second subtype, where, as in the
case above the Iirst PO is analyzed as a Complement and the second
one as an Adjunct expressing Cause or Purpose:
(49)
a. You'd better apologi:e to Mary for not writing to her.
b. The condemned man appealea to the court for mercy.
c. To whom shall I applv for a license?
d. She has just appliea to the board for a job.

Another sub-group includes relational reciprocal Vs such as argue,
aiscuss or quarrel which take as Iirst Object a Reciprocal Object,
(indicating the human participating as a partner in the respective
activity) and the second one as an Adjunct that expresses The
Theme/Topic, sometimes with a tinge oI Cause:
(50)
a. He was arguing with his wife about money.
149
b. I shall aiscuss with my neighbor about the garage.
c. The landlord aisagreea with his tenants over the rent.
c. He aisagreea with me about the terms of the settlement.
d. I quarrelea with him about a trifle.

The Subject in all these sentences is an Agent that initiates and/or
perIorms the activity. Resistance to Passivization characterizes both
PPs, whose status consequently seems to be that oI Adjuncts, adjoined
to V`:
(51)
a. *My neighbor was disagreed with.
b. * The garage was discussed about.

We notice that such Prepositional Phrases mark the transition
Irom the Iunction oI Object (a governee in Complement position) to
that oI Adverbial Adjunct (adjoined to V`). In the same area oI
transition we could place a reverse case, that oI passivizable
Adverbials. Thus some Adverbial ModiIiers oI Place expressed by
PPs allow Passivization, although they are not in the position oI
governed Objects:
(52)
a. 1. Our national hero has livea in this cottage.
2. This cottage has been livea in by our national hero.
b. 1. John Keats slept in this bed.
2. This bed was slept in by John Keats.

This phenomenon applies only to a small set oI intransitives with
Iocation expressed by PPs. The next section discussed another odd
situation: intransitives that take obligatory Adverbials.

3.3. A Hybrid Type: Intransitives with Obligatory Adverbial
Modifiers
In the previous section we have already introduced two
situations which show that the demarcation line between Prepositional
Phrases occurring as indirect internal arguments and those that are
mere Adjuncts is not so clear-cut. There are intermediate cases such as
that oI POs which behave as Adjuncts and, on the contrary, Adverbial
that behave like Objects. The discussion regarding this area oI
transition may be completed by the subcategory oI verbs presented
below. Indeed, there are particular Vs are small groups oI V items that
150
require obligatory` Adverbials. But, unlike the behavior oI the
predications in (48)-a and b, they do not allow passivization.

3.3.1. Intransitives with Manner Aaverbials
The verbs act and behave cannot occur without Manner
Adverbials:
(53)
a. I think he has actea foolishly/ like a fool// wisely.
b. He has always behavea well/decently/ in a proper way.

The Iusion between the verb and its modiIier can be proved by the
Iormation oI compounds like well-behavea (person).

3.3.2. Intransitives with Quantifving Aaverbials
The verbs cost, weigh and owe take QuantiIying Adverbials, which
might explain their resistance to passivi:ation. The Quantifving
Phrase indicates price with cost and weight with weigh (this V weigh
is to be diIIerentiated Irom its transitive counterpart the activity V to
weigh whose argument structure is marked by an Agent and an
internal Patient. Compare:
(54)
a. The two bags weigh 4b kilos/ a lot/ very much.
b. The peasant is weighing the bags.

In the Iirst sentence the verb is a stative intransitive (unaccusative)
and it requires quantiIication. In the second one the same verb is
recategorized as non-stative and it governs a Direct Object.
Pasivization is allowed only in the second case.
Further examples are predicated by cost and by the
prepositional verb amount (to a quantitv):
(55)
a. This shirt costs only 2b lei/ very litlle.
b. The taxes amount to 5bbb lei.

The verbs cost and owe occur in aative patterns in which the
QuantiIying AvP Iollows the Indirect Object:
(56)
a. The new Iurniture cost them 10.000 lei.
b. She owes her sister 200.

151
Quantifving Aaverbials of Place occur obligatorily with the verb
stretch while with motion verbs they behave as optional Adjuncts.
Compare:
(57)
a. The corn Iield stretchea miles away. * The corn Iield
stretchea.
b. I went a long way to the castle. I went to the castle.

Finally, the verb last that takes an obligatory Quantifving Aaverbial of
Time expressed by a NP or a PP marked by Ior:
(58)
The meeting lastea (for) three hours.

3.4. Predications Based on Reciprocal Intransitives
Inherently reciprocal Vs belong to the same semantic class
inherently reciprocal Prea As on the one hand, and reciprocal
transitives like marrv and resemble, on the other hand.
As known Irom the description oI other reciprocal predications
there exist two alternatives which are distinct syntactically, but
synonymous in point oI meaning. The Iexicon supplies Ior each
intransitive V belonging to this semantic class the inherent
|reciprocal| Ieature, as well as the Preposition selected Ior the
Reciprocal Prepositional Object. Here are instances oI the two
alternatives, the second oI which includes pronominal Iorms
specialized Ior this meaning and bound coreIerentially with the |set|
Subject:
(59)
a. The tramcar colliaea with the van. The van colliaea with the
tramcar.
b. The tramcar and the van/ they collided (with each other).

In the Iirst sentence the predication is symmetric, as shown by the reversal oI
the two terms. The Subject oI the second sentence may be a coordinated NP,
a plural NP or Pronoun or even a collective NP`:
(60)
a. Max has separatea from his wife.
b. The couple has separatea.
|set|

152
Some oI the inherent intransitive reciprocal Vs have transitive
|causative| counterparts, in which a Causer appears as Subject, and
the entities entering the reciprocal relation are distributed as (1) Direct
Obfect and (2) Prepositional Obfect:
(61)
The cold war separatea Susan from her family.
|caus.| DO PO
Intransitives which are inherently reciprocal select a certain
Preposition, depending on their meaning. Here are the three
possibilities:
(i) Verbs that take the Prep to and indicate a positive relationship: aaa,
attach, correspona, foin, relate, etc.
(ii) Verbs that take the Prep with (and / or to), indicating the same type
oI relationship: agree, associate, combine, colliae, confer, connect,
coinciae, aisagree, overlap.etc.
(iii) Verbs that take the Prep from and indicate a negative relationship:
aiffer, aistinguish, part, separate, etc.
Reciprocal predications, be they transitive or intransitive,
resist passivization. This might be explained by the Iact that being
symmetric, their terms can be reverted. This reordering oI the Subject
and the Object does not require any other operation. When this
reversal takes place in conIigurations with Prepositional Reciprocal
Object, the Prep remains in situ :
(62)
a. Discourse overlaps with cognitive psychology.
b. Cognitive psychology overlaps with Discourse.

3.5. Prepositional Intransitives with Complement Clauses
Several subcategories oI intransitive Vs select CPs, i.e.
Complement Clauses. Thus verbs oI seeming, the eventive V happen
or the cognition V occur take clausal Subjects, Iurther applying
Extraposition and It-Insertion:
(63)
a. It seems/appears |that the liberals will win the elections|
b. It so happens | that I`m going your way|.
c. It occurrea to me |that I hadn`t posted the letter|.

Subfect to Subfect Raising yielding the Nominative with
InIinitive` construction as alternative to strings such as (59)-a and b
above:
153
(64)
a. The liberals seem | t to win the elections|.
b. I happen | t to be going your way|.

In (63) the clausal Subject is a Iinite that Clause; in (64) the deep
Subject oI the non-Iinite Inf Clause is raised in the position oI surIace
Subject oI the main clause, leaving behind a trace.

Some oI the prepositional intransitives select CPs as Prepositional
Obfects. In Iront oI Iinite that-Clauses and oI non-Iinite InI Clauses
the Prep is deleted, but it does occur in Iront oI Gerund Clauses:
(65)
a. The leader insistea |that we should join the party|
( PrepDel)
b. The leader insistea |on our joining the party|.

The complement clause Iunctions as a Prepositional Object Clause,
despite its occurrence in S-structure without the deep` preposition
that normally accompanies the respective verb.

4. Recategorization of 1ransitives as Intransitives
As we already pointed out, transitivity evinces a Iloating
phenomenon, which goes both ways, Irom transitives to intransitives
and vice versa. We shall Iocus below on the possible recategorization
oI transitive Vs as intransitives, in other words, on the means by
which the bigger transitive class Ieeds the intransitive one. The
process may be labeled as intransitivization.
In order to derive an intransitive conIiguration, a V which is basically
transitive has to lose its Direct Object. The verb may become
obfectless by two important processes. The simpler oI the two is
Deletion of the DO. A number oI transitives allow this deletion iI their
Object NP is |generic| and they are easily understood in a given
context:
(66)
a. She smokes too much. (cigarettes ).
b. Jack arinks daily (alcoholic beverages).
c. My husband writes Ior a living (fiction).

The Reflexive Direct Obfect can also become phonologically null with
some transitive Vs, among which aress, shave or wash:
154
(67)
a. He is in the habit oI shaving (himself ) daily.
b. Have you Iinished aressing (yourself )?
c. You must wash (yourself) beIore going to bed.

This omission` oI the Object is considered to be, in Relational
Grammar terms, a case oI aemotion. By this we mean that the
respective NP ceases to bear a grammatical relation with the V and no
longer takes part in syntactic processes. Notice as well that the activity
verbs in our examples have shiIted to the class oI unergatives, as a
result oI the absence oI their Direct Object Irom S-structure.
Transitives can also shiIt to intransitives by the promotion oI
their Direct Objects. This metaphorical linguistic term reIers to the
movement oI a Grammatical Function in a higher position in the
relational hierarchy, mainly in the Subject position. This occurs in
activo-passives/ middles and in all passive constructions. The
deep Object comes to acquire some oI the Subject properties (position,
case-marking, agreement).
The two examples below illustrate NP movement to Subject position:
(68)
a. This play acts successIully. (DO o Su, V is still active)
b. This play has been actea successIully. (Passivization)

The verb in the Iirst example preserves its active Iorm, no
passive morphology being integrated. It enters the so-called middles,
which are agentless verbs, requiring the movement oI the
Patient/Theme to Subject. The second sentence is a complete Passive.
We shall not comment here on the diIIerences oI meaning between
these quasi-similar conIigurations.
The reverse process will be dealt with at the end oI the chapter
devoted to transitive predications.









155


V. SIMPLE TRANSITIVE PREDICATIONS




1. Simple 1ransitives. Covernment and Accusative Case Assignment
Transitive verbs are governors oI their sister NPs, to which
they assign Accusative case. These NPs Iunction as Direct Objects,
being marked by the lack oI preposition markers. This contrasts with
the Romanian personal` Direct Object which is marked by the
preposition pe. Compare:
(1)
a. The teacher has praisea the boy.
b. ProIesorul l-a l uaat pe b iat.

Minimally, transitives are two-argument verbs. The
correponding thematic roles are almost uniIormly an external Agent
and an internal Patient/Theme. These properties are illustrated below:
(2)


VP

Spec V`

NP V NP

Kids eat chips
(Agent) (Patient)

External Internal
Argument Argument

The Iusion` between the governing verb and its governee is
proved by the ban on adverbial insertion in between the two
constituents. Consider:
156
(3)
a. Kids eat chips aailv/ evervaav.
b.*Kids eat aailv/evervaav chips.

The Frequency Adverbial cannot be placed between the transitive verb
and its Direct Object.
The greatest majority oI transitive verbs in English express human
activities, events in which humans play an agentive part, being
initiators and controllers oI actions or processes which affect or effect
(i.e. create) concrete entities ( physical objects, substances etc.).


1.1. Subcategorization of Monotransitives according to the
Theta-Role of the Direct Object
Transitive verbs with one Direct Object are also called
monotransitives. The Iirst subgroup includes Vs that indicate activities
which take a Patient as Direct Object. The latter denotes an entity
affectea by the activity carried out by the Agentive Subject. The
property oI affecteaness is extremely important Ior the Iormation and
interpretation oI middles`, double object constructions and passives.
Not all transitive verbs take as Direct Object an aIIected` entity, i.e.
an object or a human being that undergoes a change oI state as a result
oI the activity denoted by the transitive verb. Verbs oI cutting, Ior
instance, select aIIected` objects; some oI them are included in the
lists below, alongside Vs that aIIect an entity in a constructive or
positive way (e.g. aaorn, paint, aecorate etc.) or in a negative,
destructive way (e.g. aestrov, crush, aemolish etc.)
Here is a more extensive list oI English verbs in this subgroup
(with some illustrations oI possible lexical realizations oI their Direct
Objects):
(4)
accumulate (goods, wealth, a
library),
aate (an application, a coin)
aaapt and aafust (a script, a piece
oI Iurniture)
aeal (the cards)
aaorn, aecorate, ornament (a
room, a house),
araw, pull, tug, lug, haul (a
weight)
air (the room. the bedding) arive (a car)
alternate (a device, a crop) arop (a pencil, a glass)
burn (paper, oil) feel (a cloth)
157
carrv (a box, corn) fix (a shelI)
carve (chicken) eat (vegetables)
cast (a ball, anchor) hola (a kniIe, smb.'s hand)
capture(a prey, some goods) illustrate (a book)
catch (a ball, a train) increase (a crop)
chop (a tree, wood), mark (a paper)
clip (a ticket) miss (a train, a target)
close and shut (a door) move (the Iurniture)
crush (a statue) open (a shop)
corroae (iron) operate (a machine)



Semantically, thereIore, one may Iurther subcategorize verbs
with affectea obfect into those denoting an aavantageous activitv, an
embettering oI the physical object, and those indicating partial or
total aestruction oI the respective object. The latter group includes
verbs oI consumption too, such as eat, arink, emptv.
Jerbs of aestruction actually represent the antonyms oI verbs
efficienai, the Iatin term Ior Js of creation/ manufacturing. One and
the same verb may have two diIIerent meanings one specialized as
beneficial, the other one as aestructive. Compare:
(5)
to burn oil (Ior heating or lighting) versus to burn ones
fingers, to bite metal (make holes into it Ior special purposes) versus
to bite ones tongue, to strike ones hana versus to strike oil (i.e. Iind it
aIter drilling the ground), to cut ones finger versus to cut the breaa. A
subcategory apart includes verbs which take as airect obfects parts oI
the human body. The respective NPs are determined by Possessives
which are co-reIerent with the NP in Subject position:
(6)
bare (one's head), cock (one's ears),
bite (one's tongue), arag (one's Ieet),
bump (one's head), fix / lose / pull (one's hair),
clap (one's hands), noa (one's head),
clean (one's nails), shrug (one's shoulders),
close (one's eyes), snap (one's Iingers).

The construction cannot be passivized owing to the Iact that
coreIerential NPs cannot be crossed over:

158
(7)
a.*His Iingers were snappea by him.
b.*Her hands were clappea by her.

The Iormation oI middles is Iacilitated by the degree oI aIIectedness
oI the Object. Thus Vs like wash, iron, fasten, recvcle can yield
middles in contexts with manner Adverbials:
(8)
a. This skirt washes well.
b. Those trousers iron smoothly.
c. Paper recvcles easily.

Mention should also be made oI some agentive verbs with |human|
Subjects like the Vs oI judgment (e.g. appreciate, applaua, critici:e,
eulogi:e etc.), or some oI the Vs oI linguistic communication (the so-
called verba aicenai) like assert, aamit, acknowleage ,aeclare, aenv
etc. that do not take an aIIected object, although the role marking their
NP sisters is Patient/Theme. This seems to block the Iormation oI
middles Irom such verbs. Consider:
(9)
a. Prize-winners praise well.
b. His views admit easily.
c. Peace declares easily.

The same aIIectedness constraint` regards the Iormation oI middles
Irom transitives that express sense perception (hear, Ieel, smell etc.) or
psychological reaction (love, hate, like, dislike, Iear, etc.), both oI
which take an Experiencer Subject:
(10)
a. *Velvet Ieels easily.
b. * Barking hears well.
c. * Pop music likes most/best.

In spite oI the apparent regular correlation between aIIectedness and
middles Iormation there are many counter-examples which require
diIIerent explanations. Besides the Patient is not the only role that may
associate with the property oI aIIectedness, as proves by the analysis
oI dative alternations.

159
1.2. Monotransitives with Effected/Resultative Object
These transitives are verbs of creation, which denote an
activity that results in the emergence oI a new entity. The role is still
Patient, with a tinge oI result:
(11)
bore (a hole), erect (a monument),
buila (shelter), knit (a dress),
carve (a statue), make (a toy),
compose (music), manufacture (goods),
cook (cakes), proauce / turn out (goods),
create (a model), sketch (a plan),
crochet (gloves), weave (carpets),

The subcategory can be Iurther reIined, iI we introduce the
semantic Ieatures pertaining to smaller groups oI verbs. The Iollowing
semantic classes obtain:
a) general verbs oI creation, the prototype being the verb make.
b) verbs oI creation, specialized Ior various Iields oI human activity:
technical, artistic, domestic, a.s.o.
The eIIected entity will consequently be characterized by
particular Ieature(s), among which |written stuII|, |painted stuII|,
|sculptured stuII| etc.
These verbs oIten take a second object, bearing the role
BeneIactive, the participant who takes advantage oI the respective
activity. The second Object is a PP marked by for.
Here are some conIigurations with two objects:
(12)
a. She has cooked a pi::a for her husbana.
b. The peasant is building a shelter for his cattle.
c. Grandma is knitting a shawl for her nice.

Interestingly enough, some oI the items in these classes may also
occur as verbs oI aestruction (mostly oI cutting), which alternatively
take an affectea obfect:
(13)
a. I'm going to chop this tree down. (destruction)
b. We had to chop a way through the undergrowth.(creation)
c. You should cleave this block oI wood into two!
d. They have cleft a path through the jungle.
160

The objects taken by the a) and b) classes are all |concrete|,
but some oI the verbs in the respective subcategories may be used
metaphorically, selecting an abstract entitv as Direct Object:
(14)
to buila(up) a scheme / business / reputation; to coin a word;
to concoct a story / plot; to conaense an account oI an event;
to construct a novel; to cut aown an enemy; to clear one's
conscience; to embroiaer a story; to manufacture an excuse;
to mina a word; to piece out a story; to spin a yarn; to frame a
plan / theory

One and the same verb may take, contextually, either an
affectea or an effectea Direct Object. Here are some instances, which
also point out the slight change oI meaning in the verb:
(15)
a. Who'd like to carve the chicken? (aIIected)
b. Whoever carvea this statue was a genius. (eIIected)
c. He proaucea the driving licence that very minute.
d. They will proauce ever greater crops.

A special type oI effectea / resultative obfect is the so called
Cognate Obfect taken by inherently intransitive verbs, which
recategorize, in this way, as transitives:
(16)
to smile an amiable smile, to aream a melancholv aream, to
sleep the sleep of the fust, to live a mvriaa lives etc.
.
We shall conclude our presentation oI this class by supplying
a number oI contexts with the prototvpe oI the class oI Vs oI creation
the verb to make, as well as with the semantically related activity
verb to ao. The two verbs have a many-Iold regime, they are highly
idiosyncratic and, despite their partial semantic overlapping, they are
greatly constrained by context.

1.2.1. Transitives with a Manv-fola Regime
The verbs to make and to ao are quite distinct semantically
and syntactically, although they have the same equivalent in
Romanian the verb a face. That is why a parallel between the two is
quite useIul.
161
(i) to make is a transitive verb that takes a |concrete| effectea obfect:
(17)
to make breaa / bricks / coffee / a fire / clothes/
tea / a tov, a.s.o

In all these cases it has the very concrete meaning oI to
manuIacture. This make oIten enters ditransitive conIigurations, in
which the Resultative Object is Iollowed by a for-Inairect Obfect
indicating the Beneficiarv/Benefactive:
(18)
She was very Iond oI making tovs for her little bov.

(ii) to make may select a non-contrastive obfect:
(19)
to make amenas / arrangements / a change / a aecision / a
aemana / a aifference / an effort / an excuse / a fuss / haste / a
name (for oneself) / a request / a sacrifice / a speech.

We notice that in the instances above make occurs as a prop verb, the
meaning being mainly carried by the Object. The latter is oIten a
nominal derived Irom the verb that corresponds to the whole
combination:
(20)
to make arrangements to arrange
to make a request to request
to make a promise to promise
to make a sacrifice to sacriIice oneselI

As diIIerent Irom combinations oI other verbs with the
noncontrastive obfect, however, the one with make tend to be
characterized by a greater independence oI their constituents,
passivization and even Obfect-questioning being possible in a great
number oI contexts.

(iii) to make can also occur with the more abstract meaning oI
causation. It belongs to the subclass oI periphrastic causatives,
alongside cause, have and get. It selects a Bare InIinitive Complement
and its deep Subject is raised to the position oI Object oI the main
clause. The construction is traditionally known as Accusative with
Short/ Bare InIinitive:
162
(21)
Betty`s story maae |Tony/ him cry|.

The verb make is characterized, thereIore, by a wide range oI
co-occurrence possibilities, materialized svntacticallv in the selection
oI simple and clausal objects and semanticallv in the selection oI
|concrete| or |-abstract| NPs.
The activity verb to ao does not belong to Vs oI
manufacturing.
(i) It is a generic verb oI activity, maybe the prototypical one. This
reIers to its status as lexical verb:
(22)
What on earth is she aoing in the attic?

(ii) the verb to do may also occur with |concrete| objects which may
be affectea:
(23)
a. The maid must ao the rooms daily. ( clean the rooms).
b. You should ao the pork well. ( roast the meat)
c. Mother aoes her hair once a week. ( dress one's hair)

or effectea/resultative:
(24)
a. Jan Hunt aoes the eaitorial Ior the Economist.
b. My uncle aoes the home news Ior this paper.
c. I have a lot of corresponaence to ao.

Being specialized Ior rendering the perIormance oI certain activities,it
may be Iollowed by Objects indicating all sorts oI activities, such as
writing, cooking, cleaning etc.used in the ing Iorm:
(25)
Iaura aoes the cooking Ior the Browns.

(iii) to ao may be a aitransitive verb which takes |abstract| Direct
Objects in aative constructions the Indirect Object oI which is marked
by for is always |human|:
(26)
What can I ao for you?

163
The prop verb to ao behaves like a aative with two non-prepositional
objects:
(27)
ao smb. creait / a favor / gooa / harm / homage / infurv /
fustice/ a mischief / a service / a gooa or baa turn.

Substitution by a corresponding verb lexeme is sometimes
possible:
(28)
to do smb. harm to harm smb.
to do smb. injury to infurv smb.
to do smb. honour to honour smb.

The object oI most oI these ao-constructions is non-contrastive, by
which we mean that it cannot be questioned or coordinated with a
prototypical Direct Object. Passivization is occasionally possible.

(iii) to ao and to make only very seldom vary Ireely, as in:
(29)
make / ao a copv, make / ao a translation

(iv) unlike make, the verb ao is an auxiliary specialized Ior carrying
Tense and Agreement in the negative and interrogative present or past.
The DO-Support rule inserts the auxiliary ao whenever there is no
other auxiliary in the context. It is also inserted in tag Questions.
(30)
a. Does she believe in God?
b. We aia not (aiant) cut classes, aia we?

(v) ao can also occur as an emphatic item when the verb is used
aIIirmatively in a declarative or an imperative:
(31)
a. We ao believe in God.
b. Do write me Irom Spain!

(vi) ao can also be used as a VP substitute, i.e. it is a pro-verb Iorm
which, in combination with the neuter pronoun it or the pro-adjective /
adverb so, may be used anaphorically to replace a whole VP
antecedent (with some diIIerences oI meaning between the ao it and
164
the ao so variants). The do-phrase commonly substitutes Ior the V
head and its complements:
(32)
Sheila sends e-mails in the morning, and I ao so late at night.

(vii) ao does not select complement clauses
In conclusion the regime oI to ao is closer to that oI auxiliaries, while
that oI to make proves that it is a prototypical transitive verb. Make
never recategorizes as intransitive, while ao can occur in contexts with
Manner Adverbials, where it behaves intransitively:
(33)
They are aoing well at school.

1.3. Monotransitives with 'Instrumental` Patient
A relatively small number oI monotransitives with
|concrete| DOs take the role Patient, with an instrumental tinge. The
verb denotes the use oI an instrument Ior the perIormance oI a certain
activity. Hence, the Patient acquires an instrumental meaning, which
excludes the use oI a prototypical Instrumental Object:
(34)
a. The operator was using a new device. *with a new aevice.
b. They manipulatea the equipment quite awkwardly.
d. Peter was hanaling the gun like a skilled hunter.
e. They utili:ea most of the energv Ior domestic purposes.

Another possibility is Ior the instrumental meaning to be
incorporated into the verb lexeme, which is converted Irom the noun
denoting the respective tool, means oI conveyance etc. The Direct
Object oI such instrumental verbs expresses an affectea physical
object:
(35)
a. Father hammerea there nails into the Iir plank.
b. We shall hana in our essays tomorrow morning.
c. The nazis bombea aown the little village.

1.4. Monotransitives with Locative Direct Object
Another limited group oI monotransitives with concrete`
Direct Object express position or movement in space. The directional
or locative meaning, otherwise expressed by prepositions or adverbial
165
particles or phrases is incorporated into the meaning oI the respective
verb:
(36)
to cover the floor (extend over)
to enter a place ( go in(to)),
to approach a place ( get near),
to inhabit a flat ( dwell in), to foin a club ( get in),
to leave a town ( depart Irom),
to reach a aestination ( arrive at).

1.5. Monotransitives with Abstract Theme
The next subcategory includes other classes oI verbs which
take as Object a |/ - | abstract NP or only a |abstract| one oI these
Vs mark the transition Irom the selection oI concrete entities as DOs
to that oI abstractions . The group includes:
(37)
to accept (a giIt or an idea) to examine (a paper or a theory)
to acknowleage (a parcel or
a truth)

to approach (a place or a topic) to smell (a rose or some danger)
to claim (a lost object or a right) to spin (wool or a yarn)
to analvse (a substance or
a cause)
to circulate (a paper, some news)
to collect (stamps or one's
thougts)
to mina (the step, one's own
business)
to aenv (a signature or
a proposal)
to convev (goods or inIormation

Some oI the verbs in the list above, which is Iar Irom being
exhaustive, are marked by |complementation| as well: to
acknowleage, or to claim may take, Ior instance a that-clauses as
Direct Objects.
Transitive verbs which occur only with |abstract| objects
will be themselves subdivided into those which select simple/non-
clausal abstract Objects and those which take CPs.
(i) Vs
t
with a simple abstract Direct Object include:
(38)
to abfure (religion) aaopt (a method)
abuse (authority) event (an accident, a Iailure)
abrogate (a law) commute (a punishment)
166
accomplish (a task) control (prices, one's temper)
achieve (a purpose) contract (a marriage)
aaminister (justice) conceae (a right)

(ii)Vs with abstract Direct Object expressed by a CP, include
cognition verbs, as well as verbs oI linguistic communication:
(39)
aamit
aavise
announce
arrange
assert
assume
affirm
believe
consiaer
aeem
aeclare
aecree
aream,
aoubt
estimate
expect
fancv
figure (out)
foresee
guess
imagine
infer
learn

postulate
prove
propose
reali:e
recollect
suppose
suggest
think
a.s.o.



1.6. Monotransitives with Experiencer Subjects
The verbs in the class below take |animate| Subjects (in
general human ones), but evince no selectional restrictions Ior the NP-
Direct Object.
From among them we shall mention:
(i) psychological Vs such as (like, aislike, love, hate etc. (to
aamire a person, an object, a plan), love a person, a country, comIort;
appreciate someone, a gesture; like or aislike a person, a thing or an
idea etc.)
(ii) cognition verbs such as know, unaerstana, remember or
forget a person, a thing or an idea.
(iii) sense perception verbs such as to hear someone, some
noise, some news or, with a clausal DO: hear that-Clause see, iI we
include the secondary cognition meaning; to see a person, an object; to
see meaning to understand a point( with clausal Object) e.g. see what
smb. means etc.



167

1.7. Monotransitives with Experiencer Objects
An important subcategory in the general picture oI
monotransitives is that oI attitudinal`/psychological or surprise` Vs
which express Ieelings, reactions, attitudes that are experienced by
(usually) a human being. Hence the theta-roles are Cause and
Experiencer. We have not dealt so Iar with the Cause or Causer role,
which plays a crucial part in the analysis oI causative verbs.
According to certain thematic role hierarchy this role is a candidate Ior
the Subject Iunction, ranking even higher than the Agent. With the
respective verbs the Cause may be an uncontrolled stimulus oI the
Ieeling or a controlled one. In the latter case the Cause is the Agent
that arouses the respective Ieeling:
(40)
a. The dark clouds frightenea the mountaineers.
b. The witch frightenea the kid.

Other verbs in this subgroup are: astonish, ama:e, bewilaer, aelight,
flabbergast, non-plus, please, frighten, scare, horrifv, etc. Romanian
also includes this subtype oI Experiencer causatives, with
gramaticalization oI the Exp role as Accusative Object:
(41)
a. Norii negrii i-au speriat pe alpiniyti.
b. Vr jitoarea l-a speriat pe copil.

2. Relational 1ransitives in Asymmetric or Symmetric Predications
Relational predicates Ior, as we already know, a semantic
class which can be realized syntactically by intransitive (including
copulative) or transitive conIigurations. They enter asvmmetric
structures, whose terms the Subject and the Object, are not
reversible, or svmmetric structures which allow reversibility oI the two
terms.
A good instance oI asvmmetric structure is the one made up
oI verbs that exclusively occur with human Subjects and Objects.
They can be Iurther subclassiIied into:
(i) non-reciprocal verbs denoting relationships in the human world,
human actions or reactions as to their Iellow-beings:


168
(42)
accost, aia, amnestv, apostrophi:e, banish, bapti:e, beget,
beheaa, bribe, bullv, chiae, corrupt, exile, flatter, help, insult,
ill-treat, kianap, maim, muraer, nag, pester, ostraci:e,
sentence, shave, sue a.s.o.

Some oI them appear contextually with a reciprocal meaning:
(43)
aia one another, flatter each other, help each other etc.

(ii) inherently reciprocal verbs Iorming symmetric predications. They
include marrv, aivorce and the more general similarity` verb -
resemble. These structures allow reversibility oI their Subjects and
Objects(whose selectional restrictions are identical). Possible reversal
oI position explains their resistance to passivization:
(44)
X marriea Y Y marriea X (*Y was marriea bv X)

The verbs kiss, embrace, meet, fight may behave as (i) or (ii).
Some oI the verbs denoting inter-human relations in terms oI actions
or reactions may take |- countable| NPs as Direct Objects:
(45)
appoint a committee, capture an army, cheer a team, conauct
an orchestra, lena a party, aefeat an army, serve a Iamily.

Relational verbs express svmmetric or asvmmetric inter-relations
between sets or members oI sets. Selectional restrictions, thereIore,
depend upon the logical relation the verb establishes between its
arguments. We have already mentioned reciprocal verbs which must
or may express symmetric relations between humans (marrv, aivorce;
embrace, kiss, meet a.s.o.). We shall reIer to the Reciprocal DO
Iurther on, when we deal with another pronominal object based on
coreIerence the reIlexive DO.
There are monotransitive verbs which render harmonious
relations betweeen two entities in a unidirectional way. They select
Subjects and Objects with distinct semantic Ieatures, e.g. the verbs: to
fit, to macth, to suit. Consider:
(46)
a. The tuxeao fitted him well
Su o 0
169
b. This hat / vour suggestion suits me perIectly.
c. Her shoes matched the color of her hat.
d. Marian aoesnt match Susan in cooking.

These verbs tend to resist passivi:ation (with some contextual
exceptions), because oI the strongly marked directionality oI the
established relation.
Other relational Vs express, on the contrary, non-equivalence relations
between entities:
(47)
a. Max excels his friena in writing essays.
b. Their achievements exceed / top the plan by 25.

Inclusion relationships are rendered by transitive verbs such as
contain, hola, comprise, incluae, cover a.s.o. These verbs are
semantically related to the verbs of possession:
(48)
a. The box contains 25 matches | The box has got 25 matches
in it (cI. There are 25 matches in the box).
b. This chapter comprises / incluaes 3 sections | This chapter
has (got) 3 sections (cI. There are 3 sections in this chapter).

Some oI the verbs oI inclusion resist passivi:ation, like other
relational verbs (those oI possession included):
(49)
a. *25 matches are contained in the box.
b. *3 sections are comprised in this chapter.

2.1. Transitive Verbs of Possession
Verbs oI alienable or inalienable possession include prototype
oI the class the verb HAJE, as well as own and possess; related with
them are transitives oI acquisition - GET, as well as acquire, receive,
appropriate etc. which are paraphrasable as: to come to have (Irom a
Source). The Subject denotes the Possessor (or BeneIiciary), the
Direct Object the Possessea (the Patient).
Here are some illustrations oI the wide selectional possibilities
oI these verbs:
(50)
a. Miss Abbot has (got) a sharp nose. (inalienable possession)
a nice Ilat. (alienable possession)
170
b. The dictionary has red covers.


c. The issue has several aspects.
two solutions.


Resistance to passivi:ation is quite speciIic to the class. Thus have and
possess can appear in very Iew contexts with a passive Iorm (e.g. you
have been had, it is not to be had, to be possessed by the devil).
Reversibility oI the two terms the Subject and the Object
is possible only by recourse to other lexical Vs, basically the intransitive
verb to belong to which takes the Possessea as Subject:
(51)
a. The Jonesess own / possess / have the ola villa.

b. The ola villa belongs to the Joneses.

Some HAVE conIigurations occur in alternation with existential BE
ones, some others with copulative BE predications:
(52)
a. We haa a Iight next door last night.
| There was a Iight next door last night.
b. Two cards are missing. o There are cards missing.
c. Her hat was of the same shapes mine.
| Her skirt haa the same shape as mine.

Locative existential Ss may occur in alternation with sentences
predicated by HAVE :
(53)
a. The aesk has got ten volumes on it.
Iocative D. Object Av. oI
Possessor Possessed Place
b. There are ` ten volumes ` on the aesk.
Subject Av. oI Place

2.2. Bound Direct Objects: Reciprocal and Reflexive
Reciprocal DOs are selected by the above mentioned reciprocal verbs
as Adjuncts and by non-inherent reciprocal Vs as Complements. The
Subject NP is coreIerential with the pronominal Reciprocal DO whose
171
antecedent it is. Non-inherent reciprocal do require the presence oI the
pronominal DO Ior the reciprocal reading. Compare:
(54)
a. Iogic and mathematics resemble (each other).
b. Tom and his classmate helpea each other.

Another type oI bound DO is the ReIlexive one. There are
monotransitives that assign the Patient role to an NP denoting a person
that is coreIerential with/ bound to the reIerent oI the Subject NP.
These verbs that select co-reIerential NPs as Subject and Object
belong to the domain oI ReIlexive constructions. Verb that select such
ReIlexive Dos are, Ior instance:
(55)
aamire, blame, cut, aress, kill, wash, shave etc.

The Reflexive Direct Obfect is a subtype oI aIIected` object.
It requires an antecedent to which it is bound. ReIlexive DOs occur
within the boundaries a simple IPs (sentence):
(56)
a. I washea mvself. He aamires himself.
b. Irene blames herself Ior the accident.
c.* I told Jim |that he should admire mvself{.
d.* I told Jim |that himself should admire me|.

We notice that reIlexivization does not work across sentence
boundaries.
Both types oI bound DOs resist movement to Subject as part oI
passive Iormation:

(57):
a. *Each other was helped.
b.* MyselI was washed.

Passive and Reciprocal or ReIlexive are mutually exclusive. The two
bound pronominal objects are outside the domain oI the passive.


3. 1ypology of Causative Jerbs
Causative Jerbs are transitive verbs inherently marked by
|causative| or intransitive ones recategorized as transitives (occurring
172
contextually as causatives). They can express mere causation oI an
event:
(58)
a. Tsunami causea/ aeterminea/ brought about a big disaster.
b. His total Iailure maae him give up the old plans.
c. Jim haa the technician upgrade his computer./ haa his
computer upgraded (by the technician).
d. The candidate got the clerk to type his CV./ got his CV
typed (by the clerk).

The verbs above (cause, aetermine, have, make, get) are
prototypical causatives. There are as well verbs denoting an event in
which causation is implied:
(59)
a. The cat killea all the mice. ( caused them to aie)
b. Susan taught the children French ( caused them to learn)
c. The hot temperature meltea the ice. (caused it to melt)

Causative meaning presupposes two roles: a) a Cause which
can coincide with the Agent or with the Instrument, or may simply be
an external Causer; b) a Patient which undergoes a change-oI-state
caused by the Cause, sometimes acquiring a resultative tinge. This
binary nature oI events based on causation correlates with their
syntactic regime: they are all transitive, the Cause Iunctioning as
Subject and the Patient as Direct Object:
(60)
a. The bira flue ` caused some peoples aeaths.
NP
1
- Cause |causative| NP
2
-Patient

b. The bira flue ` caused ` some people to aie
NP
1
- Cause |causative| NP
2


-Patient (resulting
state)
By Passivi:ation the Patient moves to Subfect and the Cause
becomes Prepositonal Obfect:
(61)
Some peoples aeaths were caused bv the bira flue.

Notice that verbs oI the type cause may take a non-clausal
or a clausal complement as Direct Obfect, e.g.:

173
(62)
a. The bird Ilue caused people`s deaths.
b. The bird Ilue caused |people to die|

The logical structure oI causatives in terms oI logical
predicates and argument structure may be illustrated by the
representation oI the lexical causative kill:
(63)
KIII: | CAUSE (x, |BECOME (y, |DEAD|)|)|

This structure contains three predicates; CAUSE, BECOME
and DEAD, and the elements x and y which represent the arguments
oI these predicates. We can identiIy two sub-events: a) causation;
b) becoming / inchoative. Besides there is a third predication indicating
the resulting state (that oI being DEAD). The lexical conceptual
structure oI causative, thereIore, mainly contains a causative sub-event,
hence a causative meaning and an inchoative one.
While it is true that only transitive verb constructions may
render causative meanings it is also true that not all causative verbs
are inherentlv transitive. In what Iollows we shall tackle Iirst the
inherently transitive causatives, and aIterwards the intransitive verbs
that behave contextuallv like transitive causatives.

3.1. Prototypical Causatives
We shall brieIly discuss below some oI the main
subcategories oI inherentlv causative verbs. The Iirst group includes
the prototypical causatives illustrated by (58), also labeled as
periphrastic, on account oI the Iact that they enter complex
constructions, usually involving complementation by an InIinitive
Clause.
Semantically speaking, they render the idea oI causation quite
neutrally, with the exception oI have and get which may have an
additional tinge oI compulsion or order and can only take an animate,
agentive causer as Subfect NP.
(64)
I shall have the maid sweep the steps.
( I shall oblige the maid to ...)

There are, however some generic` causatives that take NPs as
Patient. The Complex V to bring about also belongs here, alongside
174
other members oI the class: proauce, provoke (in an abstract sense),
engenaer, generate, a.s.o. The Iexicon also includes prepositional
intransitives like result in or leaa to that are analogous items to the
series oI synonyms above.
The main characteristics oI periphrastic causatives, which
diIIerentiate them Irom the subcategories oI lexical and morphological
causatives that are dealt with Iurther on consist oI:
(i) the participation in ampler syntactic constructions which oIten
include a Direct Object Clause structured as Accusative with a long or
short InIinitive (based on Subject to Object Raising);
(ii) their productivity in contemporary English, the possibility to
express causation oI events rendered by the complement clause they
select.

3.2. Lexical Causatives
The so-called lexical causatives (e.g. kill, teach, raise,
convince, persuaae, show, put, extinguish etc.) express various
activities implying causation. They are characterized by the inherent
Ieature|causative|, which makes them have a basic transitive regime.
Omission oI the Direct Object is seldom allowed:
(65)
a. * The terrorist has killea.
b. * I have put.
c. *They have extinguishea.

They Iorm pairs with intransitive or transitive verbs, denoting
the resulting state the respective activity by means oI a lexically
distinct item. Consider the pair:
(66)
a. Polonius aiea.
b. Hamlet killea Polonius.

in which aie occurs as an unaccusative one-argument verb, taking the
Patient as Subfect. The same Patient occurs as Obfect oI its causative
counterpart kill, which is a two-argument verb, with an external Agent
as Subfect. The relation between the causative item and its inchoative
counterpart is lexicali:ea, the possibility oI using the same V lexeme
in these cases being ruled out:
(67)
* Hamlet aiea Polonius.
175

This is the main diIIerence between the verbs in this class and
those belonging to the ergative subcategory, which evince no lexical
diIIerence when used transitively or intransitively:
(68)
a. The driver turnea the wheel.
b. The wheel turnea.

Here is a list oI lexical causative verbs whose paraphrase
includes the respective resultative/ inchoative counterparts, be they
transitive or intransitive:
(69)
convince cause smb. to believe smth.
entertain cause smb. to refoice (at smth.)
extinguish cause smb. to cease burning
give cause smb. to have smth.
light cause smb. to burn/shine
persuaae cause smb. to believe ana act
propel cause smb. to aavance
put cause smb. to be (in a place)
ruin cause smb. to collapse
remina cause smb. to remember smth.
rear cause smb. to rise/grow
sena cause smb. to receive smth.
teach cause smb. to learn smth.

The same type oI semantico-syntactic relation between a V
t

and V
i
characterizes a number oI pairs oI verbs, which are similar
phonologically (they diIIer by one or two sounds). Their selectional
range is, however, more specialized than that oI the corresponding Vi,
e.g. fell (trees) vs. fall (takes any concrete NP as Patient that moves to
Subject), bait (Iish/horse) vs. bite (any concrete NP as Patient in
Direct Object position::
(67)
V
i
V
t

fall - fell ( cause smth. to fall)
lie - lav ( cause smth. to lie)
rise - raise ( cause smth. to rise)
sit - set ( cause smth. to sit)
bite - bait ( cause smth. to bite)
176

The members oI the last two pairs are inter-related more loosely than
the rest. This subgroup marks the transition Irom lexical causatives to
ergatives, whose two-Iold behavior is realized by one and the same
item.

3.3. Morphologically Derived Causatives
The causative Ieature may be incorporated by verbs derived
by means oI word Iormation processes. Thus new causatives have
been produced in the course oI time by conversion (zero aIIixation) or
aIIixation by preIixes and suIIixes. Quite Irequently these
morphologically derived causatives are also used with an inchoative
meaning, their regime being ergative:
(68)
a. I softenea the onions by Irying them Ior 10 minutes.
b. The onions softenea.

3.3.1. Causatives Derivea bv Conversion
The examples in (68) illustrated the derivation oI causatives
by suIIixation Irom an Adjective source. But many such causatives are
Iormed by mere conversion, as in:
(69)
a. He emptiea the glass. (Adj o V; paraphrase: she causea the
glass to come to be emptv)
b. I have freea my arms.
c. The lady barea her teeth.

Other derivatives Irom adjectival sources include:
(70)
to better, black, blina, blue, blunt, brown, calm, clean, clear,
airtv, arv, aull, emptv, free, grav, iale, mellow, narrow, numb,
tense, tiav.
Occasionally the conversion is accompanied by a minor sound change
- to fill (m full), to arain (m arv).

3.3.2. Causatives Derivea bv Affixation
The process oI affixation can be subdivided into:
(i) prefixation, usually Irom adjectival sources denoting
properties that come to be acquired by entities as a result oI causation:

177
(71)
be-: becalm, bedim, belittle, etc.;
ais-: disable, disanimate, discontent,etc.;
en-: enlarge, ennoble, enrich, ensure, etc.

The preIix en- becomes em- in the context /p/ or /b/, as in: embitter.

(ii) suffixation, which is well represented in the area oI
English causatives. SuIIixes are added to Adjectives:
(72)
-ate: activate, diIIerentiate;
-ifv: ampliIy, happiIy, prettiIy, solidiIy, tipsiIy;
-i:e: americanize, catholicize, christianize, civilize, etc.;
-en: blacken, broaden, cheapen, darken, deepen, Iasten,

Most oI the derivatives above also behave as intransitives,
with an inchoative meaning. The respective affixes help the Iormation
oI Vs which have both a |causative| and an |inchoative| semantic
reading. Syntactically, these Vs make up Vi - Vt pairs oI an ergative
type.
Fewer causatives derive Irom Nouns sources. The means are
similar to those listed above:

(73)
a) conversion: to age, cream, decay, etc.;
b) conversion with minor souna change: to gild, grieve;

(74)

affixation:

a) prefixation:

a-: accustom;
be-: becloud, bedevil, bedew, bedwarI, etc,
ae-: decolour, deIlash, deIorce, etc.
ais-: disarm, disband, disbar, etc.
em-: embold, embank, embark, embosom, embower, emcor,
embus, empanel, emplane, empower;
en-: enamel, encage, encamp, etc.;
un-: unbelt, unbutton, unhorse, etc.
178

(75)
b) suffixation:

-ate: pulsate, stimulate;
-en: Irighten, hasten, hearten, etc.;
-ifv: acidiIy, beautiIy, codiIy, etc.;
-i:e: barbarize, burglarize, canalize, etc.;

Both derivational processes prefixation and suffixation
yield causatives such as:
(76)
acclimati:e,
beaarken,
beaeafen,
aeactivate,
aevulgari:e,
enlighten,
aisaciaifv,
aishearten,

As concerns proauctivitv, morphological causatives are only
milav (quasi) productive today, with the exception oI derivative
sending in -i:e (e.g. computerize etc.).
As Iyons points out, morphological causatives might be considered as
intermediate between lexical ones (the kill/aie type) and ergatives like
move, change, grow etc.

3.4. Further Subcategorization of Causatives
Transitive attitudinal` Vs are also | causative|, as they
express a psychological reaction aroused in a human being by an
exterior stimulus. The Cause occurs as Subfect, the Experiencer as
Direct Obfect.
(77)
The news pu::lea Betty/ her

Cause horrifiea Experiencer
pleasea
.
| causative|

The intransitive counterpart is the copulative predicate oI the type bv
aeverbal (participial) Aafective: (be) puzzled / horriIied / pleased etc.,
derived Irom psychological predicates.
179
Another subcategory is made up oI dative verbs with a causative
meaning. They take as arguments an external Agent, a Patient and a Goal.
The Patient expresses an object that is transIerred by the Agent to the Goal:
(78)
give cause smb. to have
sell cause smb. to buv
send cause smb. to receive
show cause smb. to see

From among the transitive non-causative verbs that have
developed a causative meaning, we shall mention: earn, lose, leaa and
win, as illustrated by:
(79)
a. His rudeness lost him all his frienas.
b. She lea him a aogs life.
c. The poem has earnea him a great renown.
d. The trick won him the game.

3.5. The Causative - Inchoative Relationship
The close semantic relationship between the inchoative
meaning (entrance into a new state or acquisition oI a new attribute)
on the one hand, and the causation oI this process oI becoming, on the
other hand, has already been touched upon in the previous sections.
We suggest that a syntactic paradigm might be established,
covering all the possible realizations oI the two meanings by means oI
various predication types:
(80)
a. The metal is hara.
b. The metal became (got/came to be) hara.
c. The metal haraenea.
d. The temperature haraenea the metal.
e. The temperature causea the metal to harden.
I. Jane causea the metal to become (got / come to be) hara.

Sentences (80)-b and -c express the inchoative meaning and
are synonymous; sentences d and I express the causative meaning
and are also quasi-synonymous.
In spite oI the impressive number oI causative inchoative
verbs, which might suggest that these two meanings regularly co-
relate, there are, on the one hand inchoative verbs with no causative
180
counterpart, such as the verbs of becoming proper (become, come, go),
as well as other causative verbs, sometimes even derived Irom
Adjectives, such as sharpen, that have no inchoative counterparts in
some contexts:
(81)
He sharpenea the pencil. The pencil sharpenea.

Verbs such as clear, in spite oI the possible occurrence as
both inchoative and causative, cannot appear in co-related
conIigurations, because oI specialized selectional restrictions Ior the
Subject and Object:
(82)
a. Mary clearea the table. *The table cleared.
b. The sky clearea. *Someone cleared the sky.

4. 1he Syntax and Semantics of Ergative Jerbs
Verbs which couple the basic regimes oI transitives and
intransitives Iorm a specialized system called ergative; the verb
lexeme may predicate, without any diIIerence in its phonological
Iorm, a one-term intransitive conIiguration or a two-term transitive
one:
(83)
The child broke the china
V
t
Direct Object

The china broke.
Subject V
i

Ergatives might be considered as a sub-class oI causatives
which, as diIIerent Irom lexical and morphological causatives,
derive, a transitive verb Irom an intransitive one by a :ero
morphological moaification. The intransitive renders an inchoative
meaning, it denotes a (resulting) mutation, without possibly
expressing the animate causer:
(84)
a.*The china broke by the child.
b. The china was broken by the child.

181
Causation is made explicit in the transitive construction,
which incorporates the idea oI transition from a stage into another
stage, thereIore the | inchoative| Ieature.
Among the verbs behaving like this, we encounter begin,
break, burn, change, arop, improve, increase, melt, roll, stir, turn
a.s.o., all oI which denote a change or a motion, thereIore a transition
Irom a stage into another stage. Most oI these verbs have originated in
intransitive O.E. verbs and later on developed slightly similar
transitive Iorms (the diIIerence has been preserved in the case oI fall -
fell and the rest oI the respective group, and has been leveled down in
the case oI ergatives). Thus to burn which behaves as V
i
or V
t
has
started oII as the V
i
beornan and later derived the V
t
beornan with the
meaning oI to make something burn; to sink comes Irom sincan (V
i
)
and later on developed into sencan (V
t
) meaning to make something
sink. In both cases, burn and sink, the two Iorms merged into one that
Iunctions either transitively (with a causative meaning), or
intransitively (with an inchoative meaning):
(85)
a. He burnea (up) the old documents. ( caused the
documents to burn) The old documents burnea up. (
got burned up)
b. The enemies sank our ships. ( caused our ships to sink)
Our ships sank. ( came to be sunk)

Among the transitive derivatives we shall mention the
Iollowing constructions, some oI which, when used Iiguratively, no
longer let the causative meaning be easily perceived:
(86)
bleea a patient,
breea cattle,
crack a whip / a foke,
arop ones voice,
flv a kite,
grow potatoes,
marrv ones aaughter,
pass a law,
return an answer,
sink a sum of monev,
start a horse,
starve a man,
swear a person

Interestingly enough, there are rare cases when two transitive
Iorms coexist (one oI the transitive Iorms slightly diIIering Irom the
intransitive one by a vowel). Thus, the intransitive to rise has got two
transitive | causative| counterparts:
182
1. to raise by Iar more Irequently used than (2) to denote a causea
mutation:
(87)
He raisea the banner. ( He caused the banner to rise)

2. to rise rarely used with a causative meaning as in:
(88)
The hunters rose many birds that day.

A more generalized maniIestation oI this correlation can be
encountered with the ergative verbs which are equally transitive and
intransitive, e.g.:
(89)
begin
boil,
break,
burn,
change,
combine,
connect,
aecrease,
aevelop

According to Jespersen the transitive verb renders the
causation oI "a movement or change in something", and the
intransitive one, the actual occurrence oI "the same movement" or oI
"the same change":
(90)
a. Maria has boilea the water. The water has boilea.
b. Thomas changea his plans. Thomas' plans changea.
c. The sun will melt the ice. The ice will melt.
d. We have turnea the wheel. The wheel has turnea.

The relational chains corresponding to each member oI the
pair are:
Subject V
t
Object Subject V
i

I II I
where the Obfect NP (II) oI the transitive construction occurs as the
Subfect NP oI the intransitive, while the verb lexeme remains
unchanged.
The diIIerence between the intransitive structure The china
broke and the passive one The china was broken (by smb.) lies in the
possibility oI expressing or recovering the Causer an Agent,
Instrument or Cause Proper in the passive counterpart exclusively.
183
Actually, the system oI English ergatives is not a genuine one,
as it lacks the morphological marking by one and the same case-form
oI the NPs Iunctioning as Subject oI V
i
and Object oI V
t
, respectively:
(91)
Marriage has changed him He has changed.
| Acc| | Nom|
That is why it would be more appropriate to consider these
verbs as ergative-like. It is true, on the other hand, that ergative
properties characterize English to a greater extent than Romance Is,
Ior instance, in which the respective J
i
- J
t
ergative-like pairs
Irequently have as correlatives a J
t
- J
refl
pair:
(92)
Ion a mi,cat piatra. Piatra s-a mi,cat.
*Piatra a mi,cat.
The number oI ergative-like in these I-s is more limited and
cases oI Iree variation V
i
/ V
reIl
are encountered.
(93)
Iectorul a continuat prelegerea.
Prelegerea a continuat.


184


VI. COMPLEX TRANSITIVE PREDICATIONS


Transitives evince the same lexical and syntactic potential as
intransitives as regards their occurrence in more complex patterns.
Iexically there is a whole range oI Complex/Phrasal Vs, which can be
neatly subcategorized. Syntactically too, the Iexicon supplies
inIormation about ditransitives` (Vs with two Objects), Prepositional
Transitives, etc.

1. 1ransitives with Particle vs. Intransitives with Particle
We have already described Intransitives with Adverbial
Particle (Prt), opting Ior the hypothetical existence oI a PrtPhrase
whereIrom the Prt moves to the V, being incorporated in it, Iinally
behaving as a single unit. This hypothesis was chosen Irom among
several other possibilities.
Traditionally, the complex/phrasal transitive V is also
considered to be a single unit, despite its lexical complexity.
Semantically this is proved by providing one word equivalents to the
VPart combination:
(1)
to bring about to cause
to look up to search (information)
to take in to accommoaate
to take off to mimic or imitate
to turn aown to refuse

Besides this semantic Iusion the VPrt also behaves syntactically
as a single constituent. Some data can prove it (e.g. the gapping
together oI V and Prt in Iront oI coordinate NPs used as DOs: He turnea
off the gas ana the water). Iinguists even consider that the VPrt can
assign case to its Object.
There are, however, some counterarguments:
(i) the NP Iunctioning as DO can be placed in
between the V and the Particle. This used to be
explained as being the result oI Prt Movement
(ii) is the Object is pronominal the only possible
sequence is V ` Pronoun ` Prt
185

One solution would be to resort again to the hypothesis put
Iorth by Haegeman and Gueron that the V occurs independently Irom
the Prt at the level oI D-Structure. The V governs a PrtPhrase similar
to the PP. The Prt is head and the NP occurs as its complement. But
unlike the preposition, the Particle is not a case-assigner, thus the
respective projection is a violation oI the case Iilter. Consequently one
way out is to move the Particle to V which incorporates it. A second
solution would be Ior the NP to move to the position oI SpeciIier oI
the PrtPhrase, where it can be assigned case by V. The two
movements leave behind the moved constituents coindexed traces:
(2)
VP

Spec V`

V Prt P

Prt`

switch Prt NP
on the light


VP

Spec V`

V* Prt P

V Prt`
switch on
Prt NP
t
We have only represented above the Iirst solution which was
adopted Ior complex intransitives too.
One more solution comes Irom Kayne (1995) who analyses
the sequence NP ` Prt as a Small Clause taken by the verb. For an
interesting reconciliation oI the above mentioned proposals see Avram
(2003:247-250)
186

1.1. Complex Verbs with Two Alternations
The great majority oI transitives with Prt enter either the
sequence (i) V ` Prt ` NP or (ii) V ` NP/ Pronoun ` Prt. The order, in
case the object is pronominal is the one in (ii). Here are some
examples:
(3)
a. The man fillea in the application correctly.
b. 1. The man fillea the application in correctly.
2. The man fillea it in correctly.

Here are some other complex transitives that alternate in the same
way:
(4)
to blow up (a photograph),
to break down (expenditure),
to clean out (a room),
to plav back (a programme),
to make up (a story),
to put up (the prices),
to trv out (a machine),
to bring up (the children),
to take off (a person) etc.

II the Object NP is Complex / Heavv we may apply partial
shift oI the Object NP (in the case below, the relative clause) in Iinal S
position:
(5)
We can plav the tapes back |that you recorded last week]
head Part Rel Cl
The alternative is to incorporate the Part in the V, so that the Complex
NP occupies the Iinal S position:
(6)
We can plav back the tapes that you recorded last week.

The contexts below illustrate the possible alternations oI
sequences in dative conIigurations:
(7)
a. The button has come loose. Will you sew me a new one on?
IO DO Prt
187
b. Will you sew on a new one for me?
Prt DO IO
c. Will you sew a new one on for me?
DO Prt IO
The Adverbs straight and right may intensiIy the Prt, iI the
combination is not highly idiomatic:
(8)
a. The shops put the prices straight up.
b. The daily help cleaned the place right out.

As a result oI Nominali:ation, hyphenated or non-hyphenated
compounds may be obtained; they behave like the ones derived Irom
intransitives with Prt:
(9)
a. The studio will ao a good blow-up oI your photographs.
b. The accountant aia a break down oI expenditure.

Passivi:ation applies in a way similar to prepositional
intransitives: the Prt is incorporated in the V, the Object is moved to
Subject oI the passive sentence:
(10) Pass
We pickea up the bill The bill was pickea up.

Dative configurations have two passive counterparts:
(11)
a. They sent down the new directory to the bosso Pass
b. The new directory was sent down to the boss. (DOo Su)
c. The boss was sent down the new directory. (IO o Su)

Despite the word order similarity between passives oI
prepositional intransitives and transitives with Prt, there occur stress
placement diIIerences in the passive results, as shown by:
(12)
a. The doctor's been sent for.
b. The student's been sent down (Irom a university).

The compound participial Irom (V ` en Prt) may be used as
a Noun ModiIying Adjective:
(13)
the filled-in application
188
your made-up stories

1.2. Complex Transitives with no Alternation
The Iirst group includes Vs which never take the Prt as
immediate neighbor in surIace structure: the Object NP always
precedes the Prt. The diIIerence between non-pronominal and
pronominal Objects is thus eIIaced:
(14)
a. The comedian aoesnt get his jokes /them across.
b. The police movea the spectators / them along.
c. The government will see the crisis through.

Other contexts include, Ior instance, to knock (a blow) off, to
throw (the ball) in.
Notice that the Prt is more independent semantically in such
combinations.
The second group comprises complex verbs that are
obligatorily Iollowed by the Prt which is Iollowed in its turn by the
NP:
(15)
a. The hedgerows put forth new buds.
b. Many households take in lodgers.
c. The cavalry will bring up the rear.
d. The search party has given up all hope.

The pronominal Object, however, splits the sequence above.

1.3. Transitives with Particle and Preposition
The last subcategory we are going to discuss is that oI
transitive V^NP sequence Iollowed by a Particle and a PP Iunctioning
as Prepositional Object. The DO always occurs in between the V and
the Prt ` PP sequence, e.g.:
(16)
a. We brought them around to a different way of thinking.
Obj Prt P Obj
b. The women aeckea themselves out in silk gowns.
ReIl DO Prt P Obj
coreIerential NPs

189
c. I fillea Marian in on the latest events.

Here are some other complex transitives belonging to the same
subclass:
(17)
to bring smb. up against smth.
to get smth. off to a good start (idiom)
to Iob smb. off with smth.
to let smb. in on smth.
to put smth. down to smth.
to put smb. up to smth.

We notice that most oI the combinations above have a
|causative| meaning. Selectional restrictions oIten require a
|human| Direct Object.

2. 1ransitives with Prepositional Object
In what Iollows we shall concentrate on transitives with
Prepositional Object, namely those which take an external Agent or a
Cause as Subject and a Patient as Direct Object. The Prepositional
Object is more or less obligatory, marking the transition Irom
Complement to Adjunct:
(18)
a. The jury accusea the culprit (of murder) optional PO
b. The war bereft her of her husband. obligatory PO

Here are some oI the items in this subcategory:
(19)
accuse, smb. of smth.,
acquaint smb. with smth.,
aamonish smth. of/against smth.,
aavice smb. of/ about smth.,
blame smb. for smth.,
bullv smb. into smth.,
charge smb. with smth.,
congratulate smb. on/for smth.

Some oI these conIigurations allow alternations:
(20)
a. 1. They blamea Tony for their failure.
190
2. They blamea their failure on Tony.
b. 1. The thieves robbea him of all his monev. /
2. The thieves robbea all his monev from him.

2.1. Transitives with Instrumental Prepositional Object
as Adjunct
Most oI the verbs with affectea Obfect presuppose as well an
Instrument as one oI their arguments. This applies to Vs oI cutting and
to Vs oI hitting:
(21)
slice/ cut/ break/ hit |Agt, Pat, (Ins)|

Hence, the possible occurrence oI Instrumental Prepositional Obfects:
(22)
a. John dug the ground with an ola spaae.
b. She caught the butterIly with a net.
c. The child was eating the rice pudding with a tinv fork.
d. They destroyed the suburbs with an atomic bomb.

With verbs that presuppose a speciIic instrument, the
Prepositional Object is required Ior Iurther delimitation oI the
instrument:
(23)
a. John kickea the ball with his left foot.
b. She slicea the bread with a very sharp knife.

2.2. Transitive Alternations with Prepositional Phrase as Adjunct
The Iirst subgroup includes verbs Iollowed by an NP
Iunctioning as Direct Object, and a prepositional NP (PP), Iunctioning
as Prepositional Object. The theta-grid is made up oI an external
Agent and an internal Patient. The third role is usually an Instrument
or a Iocation; they both behave as Adjuncts and are adjoined to V`:
(24)
a. The workers loaded the truck with hay.
b. The company supplied its clients with second-hand goods.
c. The boy heaped his plate with chips.

The Patient has a locative tinge, which allows its use as
genuine Iocation (as Adverbial) in some alternative patterns:
191
(25)
a. the workers loaded hay onto the truck
b. The boy heaped chips on his plate.

Further contexts prove that this is a subgroup with its own
syntax and semantics:
(26)
a. Joe smeared some paint on / upon his frienas back.
b. Joe smeared his frienas back with paint.
c. The woman emptied the water from the bucket.
d. The woman emptied the bucket of water.

2.3. Transitives with Adverbial of Place
Some monotransitive motion verbs, which are |causative|
take an Aaverbial of Place aIter their Objects. They indicate a change
oI position, caused by a movement perIormed by the Agent or Cause
marking the Subject:
(27)
a. You should fasten the rope to the hook.
DO Adv. Place
b. I will lay the volume on the lower shelf.
c. She has thrown all the ola papers into the basket.
d. I have set the volume in its ola place.
e. Mother removed the ola furniture from the living-room.

2.4. Monotransitive verbs with Predicative Adjunct
Verbs that take an affectea obfect and which denote the
causation oI a change-oI-state in the respective entity take a
Predicative Adjunct which Iollows the Direct Object and expresses the
resultative state. The Direct Object in surIace structure is the deep
Subject oI the Predicative. The two Iorm a Small Clause:
(28)
a. John hammered | the metal flat|.
Small Clause PAdj to DO
b. John wiped | the surface clean |.
c. Mary wrenched |the stick free |
d. Mary shot |him dead|.

192
The lass including appoint, aesignate, name, christen,
nominate, make (in the sense oI nominate) occur with a Small Clause
consisting oI an NP Iunctioning as Subject in deep structure and as
surIace DO having as Predicate a Predicative which expresses the
name, title or position acquired by the protagonist (Subject oI IP) as a
result oI the naming / appointing action. Here are some examples:
(29)
a. They electea [ Mr. 1ones // airector of the new profect{.
Small Clause Pred.A to the DO
b. We have appointea [Mary chairman of our societv{.
c. The committee nominatea [1ohn Smith honorarv
presiaent{.

By Passivization the Predicative Adjunct comes to reIer to the
Subject:
(30)
Mr. 1ones was elected director oI the new project.

2.5. Causatives with an Obligatory AvP of Place
The second subcategory includes recategorized intransitives
that take a |-animate|, |-abstract| Direct Obfect and an obligatory
Aaverbial of Place. The DO usually has an instrumental meaning. It
denotes either a part oI the human body, or a physical Object:
(31)
a. She leant her elbows on the table.
Subj V DO Av Place
|caus| |part oI human body|
(| She leant on the table with her elbows.|
Prep Obj
|instrument|
b. He stavea his arms upon his knees.
c. The aog restea its heaa on mv knee.
d. He was resting his elbows in an armchair.
e. She struck her hana against a stone.

A small group oI intransitive or transitive verbs acquire a aetrimental
meaning when converted into causatives:
(32)
a. He caught his Ioot in a rope (V
t
)
| He had/got his Ioot caught in a rope.
193
b. He ran a thorn into his Iinger. (V
i
o V
t
)
| He had/got his Iinger run through by a thorn.

3. Brief Description of Ditransitives. 1he Double Object
Construction
Ditransitive verbs predicate dative` conIigurations that
express a change oI possession by means oI a transIer initiated/ caused
by an Agent. The predicating verb is called ditransitive because it
selects two complements, one that Iunctions as Direct Object and
another one that Iunctions as Indirect Object. The latter can be
prepositional (marked by to or by for or non-prepositional).

3.1. The Argument Structure of Dative Verbs
Ditransitive verbs have an external argument an Agent who
is the initial Possessor, and two internal arguments: the Patient
corresponding to the transIerred entity and the Goal (in the case oI to-
datives). There is a second variant in which the second internal
argument is a BeneIactive (corresponding to the Ior-dative). Compare:
(33)
a. 1. The wizard gave the golaen ring to the princess. |Ag,
Pat, Goal|
2. The wizard gave the princess the golaen ring. |Ag,
Goal, Pat|
b. 1. The gentleman bought the golaen ring Ior his Iiance.
|Ag, Pat, Ben|
2. The gentleman bought his Iiance the golaen ring |Ag,
Ben, Pat|

The two variants in (33)-a and b are quasi-synonymous, but Irom a
syntactic point oI view they diIIer in the positioning oI the Direct and
the Indirect Objects.

3.2. The Syntax of Datives : the Two Alternations
The two synonymous structures make up the Dative
Alternation` which is valid Ior most oI the dative verbs in English.
These variants used to be related transIormationally in the GT
194
grammar Irame. II the semantics oI datives is relatively well-deIined
and unitary, the syntax is quite idiosyncratic. Thus, although the
majority oI dative verbs enter the alternation oI structures, there are
two groups that deviate Irom this regular behavior.

3.3. Ditransitives with Two Non-prepositional Objects
The only structure predicated by the respective verbs is based
on the sequence: V ` NP ` NP:
(34)
a. She envied Freddy his talent.
b. I can`t Iorgive Susan her rude gesture.
c. He has asked me several diIIicult questions.

This group oI ditransitives includes:
(35)
ask, answer, cost, aeal (a blow), teach, paraon, bia, save,
spare, bet, strike, envv, forgive, gruage, allow and give with
non-contransitive DOs (e.g. give smb. a punch in the nose/ a
kiss/ a hug etc.)

3.4. Ditransitives with Obligatory Prepositional Indirect Object
The opposite` situation is represented by predications that
obligatorily take a prepositional IO. This happens with verbs such as:
(36)
a. announce, communicate, mumble, mutter, aictate, aemonstrate,
aescribe
b. contribute, aeliver, aonate, return or transfer

Here are some contexts:
(37)
a. Joan returnea the ring to Henry. * Joan returnea Henry
the ring.
b. She aescribea the scene to her Iriend. * She aescribea her
Iriend the scene.


195
3.5. Subcategorization of Dative Transitives
We consider dative verbs that participate in the alternation a
case oI syntactic regularity. They Iorm the domain oI the dative which
is Iurther subdivided into
(i) Subcategories with to-Indirect Object
1) the `bring class includes verbs denoting the direct and
accompanied physical transIer oI an object Irom an Agent to a
Goal expressed by the IO:
(38)
bring, take, carrv, arag, hana, haul, pass, pull, push

2) the `give class including Vs that denote the direct and
unaccompanied transIer oI an object to a Goal expressed by
the IO:
(39)
aavance, awara, ceae, conceae, entrust, feea, give, lease,
lena, loan, pav, rent, sell, serve.

3) the sena class includes Vs denoting an unaccompaniea
physical transIer oI an object Irom an Agent to a Goal:
(40)
float, fling, forwara, hurl, lower, mail, pitch, push, relav, roll,
ship, shove, sliae, throw, toss etc.

4) the `communication J class is Iurther subdivided into:
a) the raaio - class
(41)
raaio, wire, cable, telegraph, telephone and other Vs meaning
to send by means oI X: shout, gesture, relav, mail.

b) the linguistic communication class:
(42) tell, cite, preach, quote, reaa, write.

The Iollowing Vs are always marked by the preposition to`
(43)
aamit, articulate, confess, aeclare, explain, mention, mumble,
mutter, narrate, recite, recommena, recount, repeat, report,
state, utter, voice.
196
5) the cpromisec class includes V-s reIerring to subsequent or
projected acquisition oI an object by a Goal:
(44)
allot, assign, bequeath, grant, guarantee, offer, owe (in the
sense oI material debt), permit, promise etc.
(ii) Subcategories with for -Indirect Objects
1) the cmakec class (ccreative actc Vs or verba efficienai)
includes Vs with effectea DO:
(45)
boil, cook, araw, knit, make, roast, paint a.s.o.

2) the cbuvc class consists oI Vs denoting activities involving
selection:
(46)
buv, choose, gather, get, fina, leave ( leave behind), pick out,
procure, purchase, save.

3) artistic performance J-s Irom the third class and include:
(47)
chant, aance, plav, recite, sing. (smth.Ior smb.)

3.6. Problems with the Approach to Datives
Among the most ticklish problems which arise in connection
with dative constructions in English the one related to case-assignment
(to the second object) might be the most diIIicult. Besides the two
structures are not perIectly synonymous, hence no uniIorm
explanation can be supplied. The analyses so Iar are only partly
explanatory.

4. Recategorization of Intransitives as 1ransitives
Intransitive verbs may Iloat to transitive ones in various ways.
In order to become transitive they have to acquire` an Object. We
shall supply below the main modalities by which this Object
acquisition` is achieved in English.

197
4.1. Intransitive Verbs Recategorized as Transitive by Resultative
Object Formation
Intransitive verbs may recategorize as transitives by taking an
affectea obfect; marked by a hybrid Patient role with a resultative
meaning:
(48)
to crv (tears),
flash (Iire),
scintillate (glints, sparkles),
shine (a light),
weep (tears),
sweat (blood and water).

The NP Iunctioning as Direct Object oIten contains a Noun
ModiIier expressed by an Adjective, which indicates the mode or
cause oI the action / gesture, e.g.:
(49)
a. She put her arms down and cried quiet tears (cried quietly).
b. The young man's eyes were Ilashing fire.
c. His eyes scintillated an extraordinary light.
d. The old servant had blooa ana water to please his master.
e. He wept hot tears upon his mother's grave.

An interesting recategorization, which may acquire a
metaphorical use, occurs in the case oI impersonal weather verbs:
(50)
a. It rained a November ari::le.
b. It rained fire ana brimstone.
c. It rained blooa/frogs/invitations.

Incorporation oI a causative meaning results in a personal use
oI these verbs (they take a |human| Subject). The meaning is always
Iigurative, as in:
(51)
He rained gifts upon his relatives.

The verbs look, ga:e, stare, glare, peep, peer, as well as other
verbs expressing human Ieatures or attitudes: to smile, noa, laugh,
breathe, sob, roar, all oI which are basically intransitive appear as
198
recategorized when they mean express by V-ing. The attitude
expressed appears as resultative direct object:
(52)
a. He said nothing but glancea a question.
b. Mother noaaea approval.
c. The gentleman bowea his thanks.
d. She was starting her surprise/aiscontent.
e. He smilea appreciation/approval oI the hostess' behavior.

The Resultative Obfect thus obtained is constrained stylistically.
The use oI V
i
NPs thus Iunctioning is almost set or Irozen.
The stylistic advantage is great concision oI the surIace conIiguration,
in which two underlying predicates are reduced to one. (cI. Romanian:
El mul umi nclinndu-se). Focusing is on the attituae expressed by a
human gesture or other.
Syntactically, this object is not a term, in the sense that it does
not take part in Iurther syntactic processes, mainly in Passivization.
The object is totally dependent upon the verbal context, it cannot be
Ironted:
(53)
*Daggers were looked by his Ioe.

In Romanian, besides two-verb constructions, speakers most
Irequently resort to V Manner Aaverbial (expressed by an adverb
proper or by a PP) a r sufla u,urat, a ofta cu c in etc.

4.2. Recategorization by Cognate Object Formation
It is a special type oI Resultative Object, which is a perIect
lexical copy oI the verb or a merely semantic one. The Iirst type is
traditionally labelled as object uniIorm with the verb (Poutsma) and
includes basically intransitive verbs which recategorize as transitive
by means oI the copy-object. The peculiarity oI the Object NP lies in
its consisting oI a heaa-N - the nominal (ization) corresponding to the
Verb and a Moaifier expressed by an adjective which indicates the
manner in which the action/process takes place:
(54)
to aream a wonaerful aream,
to live a miserable life,
to laugh a merrv laugh,

199
to aance a slow aance,
to frown an angrv frown,
to snow a heavv snow,
to sing a melancholv song,
to sleep a quiet sleep,
to smile an aaorable smile etc.

The simpler synonymous construction, predicated by the
respective intransitive verb is oI the Iorm: V
i
Manner Adverbial:
(55)
to live miserable,
to laugh merrilv,
to snow heavilv,
to sing saalv,
to smile aaorablv,
to sleep quietlv, a.s.o.
Janet smilea a bright smile. Janet smilea brightlv.
V
t
Adj N V
1
Adv Manner

NP VP

The second subtype oI Cognate Object is realized by two
distinct lexical items (the object is not uniform with the verb: V z N).
The phonological diIIerence between the verb and the noun may by
negligible, the noun being inter-related derivationally with the verb
lexeme, as in:
(56)
to aie a aeath,
to tell a tale,
to speak a speech.

The second possibility concerns combinations such as:
(57)
to run a race,
to fight a battle,
to aance a walt: a.s.o.

Some oI the Vs that may take a Cognate Object are,
nevertheless transitive, e.g. to araw a arawing, to sing a song etc.
Because oI the Iact that these DOs are regarded by speakers as
200
redundant, DO Deletion oIten applies, yielding an intransitive surIace
string.

4.3. Recategorization by Annihilation of the Preposition
Appliable on some prepositional Vs may also result in surIace
J NP sequences, thus causing the recategorization oI the respective
intransitives. In the Iollowing VPs the deletable Prep is indicated
between brackets:
(58)
to fump (over) a fence,
to pass (bv) a builaing,
to skip (over) some pages,
to swim (across) a river,
to talk (about) business,
to turn (rouna) the corner.

The Prep taken by these basically intransitive Vs is
meaningIul, it indicating, in most cases, the airection oI the motion
rendered by the V (except combinations such as talk about smth.).

4.4. Dummy IT Direct Objects
Dummy IT Direct Objects attached to basically intransitive V
S

also bring about their recategorization. Idiomatic phrases such as the
locatives:
(59)
to pub it, to inn it,
the instrumentals:
(60)
to foot it, to bus it, to taxi it
or the behavioral:
(61)
to laav it ,to lora it

contain a V converted Irom the corresponding N and a pronominal NP
which only evinces the position property oI the DO. Hence, such IT
Objects cannot be considered as genuine terms; they do not participate
in syntactic processes like passivi:ation, relativi:ation etc. The
combinations being Irozen, they cannot, on the other hand, be leIt out
by aeletion. This type oI IT Object, which also occurs in some
201
idiomatic transitive V constructions (e.g. to get it hot/in the neck, to
make it, to catch it a.s.o.) may be said to have a vague situational
meaning.

4.5. Causative Transitives Derived from Intransitives
They are derived Irom basically intransitive V-s also represent
important recategorization instances. Constructions such as:
(62)
to flv smb.,
to float smth.,
to march smb.
to stana smb.
to walk smb. etc.,

take as DOs animate or inanimate NPs that commonly occurs as the
argument expressed by the Subject oI the corresponding Vs. The
Subject oI the newly Iormed pattern expressing causation is a Causer
oI the action or process rendered by the recategorized V
i
:
(63)
a. He walkea the horse up and down!
b. They used to gra:e the sheep on the neighboring meadow.
c. He workea his men ruthlessly.
d. You may sit aown ten people with ease.

Although the verbs walk, gra:e, work, sit are inherently
intransitive they may be paraphrased by cause smth. / smb. to V
i
,
thus becoming transitive by causative incorporation.

*
* *
The issues targeted by the present book Iall into two. The ones
that let themselves be described, illustrated and even explained, instill
us with a Ieeling oI saIety` as to the regular way language works. The
other ones slip and slide, making us set up Iuzzy sets, scales and
gradients. The boundary between transitivity and intransitivity,
recurrently discussed throughout this book, is, maybe, the best
example. Such issues are open, mysterious and thereby much more
challenging than the Iormer.
202


































203



BIBLIOGRAPHY





Aarts, B., English Svntax ana Argument Structure, Macmillan Press
Itd., 1997.
Alexander, I.G., English Grammar, Iongman English group Itd.,
1996.
Avram, I., English Svntax. The Structure of Root Clauses, Oscar
Print, 2003.
Avram, I., Auxiliaries ana the Structure of Language, Editura
Universit ii din Bucuresti (Philologica Bucuresiensia 4), 1999.
Baciu, I., English Morphologv: Wora Formation, Editura Universit ii
din Bucuresti, 1998.
B descu, A., Gramatica limbii engle:e, Editura Stiin iIic si
Enciclopedic . Bucuresti, 1984.
Bolinger, D., Adjectives in English Attribution and predication`,
Lingua 18: 1-34, 1967.
Bresnan, J., Control and Complementation`. The Mental Representation
of Grammatical Relations, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press,
1982.
Broughton, G., Penguin English Grammar, Penguin Group, 1990.
Budai, I., Gramatica engle: , teorie ,i exerci ii, Teora si Nemzeti
Tankknyvkiado, 1997.
Chalker, S., A Stuaents English Grammar Workbook, Iongman,
1994.
Chomsky, N., Aspects of the Theorv of Svntax, Cambridge, Mass.:
MIT Press, 1965.
204
Chomsky, N., Language ana Mina, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, New
York, 1972.
Chomsky, N., Reflections on Language, Iondon: Fontana, 1981.
Chomsky, N., Knowleage of Language: Its Nature, Origin, ana Use,
New York: Praeger, 1986.
Chomsky, N., The Minimalist Program, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT
Press, 1995.
Close, R. A., A Universitv Grammar of English, Workbook, Iongman,
1974.
Collins, Cobuild, English Grammar, Harper Collins Publishers,
Iondon, 1992.
Cornilescu, A., English Svntax, v. II, TUB, 1984.
Cornilescu, A., Concepts of Moaern Grammar, EUB, 1995.
Cornilescu, A., English Complementation: a Minimalist Perspective,
EUB, 2003.
Dobrovie-Sorin, C., Sintaxa Limbii Romane. Stuaii ae Sintax
Comparat a Limbilor Romanice, Univers, Bucuresti, 2000.
Downing, A. & Ph. Iocke, A Universitv Course of English Grammar,
Prentice Hall, 1992.
Dowty, D., Thematic proto-roles and argument selection`, Language
67: 547-619, 1991.
Dutescu-Coliban, T., Grammatical Categories of English, TUB, 1983.
Emonds, J., A Transformational Approach to English Svntax, New
York: Academic Press, 1976.
Evans, V., CPE- Use of English, Express Publishing, 1998.
Giorgi, A & F. Pianesi, Tense ana Aspect. From Semantics ana
Morphosvntax, New York/OxIord: OxIord University Press,
1997.
Green, G., Semantics ana Svntactic Regularitv, Bloomington: Indiana
University Press, 1974.
205
Graver, B.D., Aavancea English Practice, OxIord University Press,
1997.
Haegeman, I., J. Gueron, English Grammar, A Generative
Perspective, OxIord, UK/ Mass Blackwell, 1999.
Hoekstra, T.& R. Mulder, Unergatives as Copular Verbs: Iocational
and Existential Predication`, Linguistic Review 7:1-79, 1990.
Holmes, J., The Svntax ana Semantics of Causative Jerbs, UCI
Working Papers in Iinguistics, Univ. College Iondon, 1999.
Hopper, P. & S. Thomson, Transitivity in Grammar and Discourse`,
Language 56(2):251-299, 1980.
Huddleston, R. D., English Grammar. CUP, 1991.
JackendoII, R., X-bar Svntax: a Stuav of Phrase Structure, Cambridge,
Mass.: MIT Press, 1977.
Jacobs, R., An English Svntax, A Grammar for English Language
Professionals, OxIord University Press, 1995.
Kayne, R., The Anti-Svmmetrv of Svntax, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT
Press, 1994.
Keiser, S. J. & T. Roeper, On the Middle and Ergative Construction
in English`, Linguistic Inquirv 15: 381-416, 1984.
IakoII, R., Passive Resistance`, Papers from the Seventh Regional
Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Societv, 149-162,
University oI Chicago: Chicago Iinguistic Society, 1971.
Iarson, R., On the Double Object Construction`, Linguistic Inquirv
17: 501-557, 1988.
Iasnik, H. & J. Uriagereka, A Course in GB Svntax, Cambridge,
Mass.: MIT Press, 1988.
Ievin, B. & Rappaport-Hovav, Unaccusativitv, Cambridge, Mass/Iondon,
England.: MIT Press, 1995.
Ievin, B., English Jerb Classes ana Alternations. A Preliminarv
Investigation, Chicago/Iondon: The University oI Chicago
Press, 1993.
206
Marantz, A.P., On the Nature of Grammatical Relations, Cambridge,
Mass.: MIT Press, 1984.
O`Dowd, E., Prepositions ana Particles in English. A Discourse-
Functional Account, New York: OxIord University Press,
1998.
Milton, J., B. Blake, V. Evans, A Gooa Turn of Phrase, Express
Publishing, 1999.
Pan Dindelegan, G., Sintaxa transforma ional a Grupului Jerbal in
Limba Roman , Editura Acad. RSR, Bucuresti, 1974.
Pan Dindelegan, G., Elemente ae gramatic . Dificult i, controverse,
noi interpret ri, Humanitas Educational, Bucuresti, 2003.
Pollok, J-Y., Verb movement, UG, and the structure oI IP`. Linguistic
Inquirv 20: 365-424, 1989.
Quirk, R., S. Greenbaum, J. Svartvik, A Grammar of Contemporarv
English, Iongman Group Itd., 1972.
RadIord, A., Svntactic Theorv on the Structure of English, A
Minimalist Approach, Cambridge University Press, 1997.
Rapaport, T. R., The Middle, Agents, and for-Phrases`, Linguistic
Inquirv 30(1): 147-155, 1999.
Rizzi, I., The Iine structure oI the leIt periphery`. Ms. University oI
Geneva, 1995.
Serban, D, R. Ha gan, D. Dr gusin, English Svntax Workbook,
Editura Funda iei Romania ae Maine, 2004.
Serban, D., English Svntax, vol. 1, TUB, 1984.
Tenny, C., Grammaticali:ing Aspect ana Affecteaness. Doctoral
Dissertation, MIT, 1987.
Vince, M., Aavancea Language Practice, Heinemann, 1984.
Williams, E., Grammatical Relations`, Linguistic Inquirv 15(4): 203-
238, 1984.


207
CORPUS (selected Irom):
Collins Cobuild, 1988. English Language Dictionarv, Richard Clay
Itd, Bungay, SuIIolk, England.
Dic ionarul BBC engle:-roman, bilingv ,i explicativ, Editura Coresi,
1999.
Nedelcu C., Murar I., Bratu A. & Bantas A., Dic ionar roman-engle:,
Editura Teora, 2001.
The Oxfora English Dictionarv, 2nd ed., OxIord: Clarendon, 1989.
The Penguin English Dictionarv, Penguin Books Itd., Iondon,
England, 2003.























208


























Redactor: Andreea DINU
Tehnoredactor: Vasilichia IONESCU
Bun de tipar: 06.02.2006; Coli tipar: 13
Format: 16/61u86
Editura si TipograIia Funda iei Romania ae Maine
Splaiul Independen ei nr.313, Bucuresti, Sector 6, O.P. 83
Tel./Fax: 316.97.90; www.spiruharet.ro
e-mail: contactedituraromaniademaine.ro