5.2.1 Unaccusative verbs
Perhaps the simplest verb type, seen from a lexical perspective, is a group known as unaccusative verbs. At first sight, these look like simple intransitive verbs, though we shall see that they are in fact simpler than intransitives (or at least, intransitives are more complex!). Unaccusatives take one DP argument to which they assign a theme Θ-role. They may also, optionally in most cases, take a location or path argument expressed by a PP:
| (8) | a | a letter arrived (in the mail box) (from the tax office) |
| b | the train departed (from the station) (to Helsinki) | |
| c | the disease spread (to other towns) | |
| d | the table sat in the corner | |
| e | the heater stood against the wall | |
| f | the gas appeared (from nowhere) | |
| g | the snow settled (on the roof) | |
| h | the Picts lived in Scotland | |
| i | the water ran (down the wall) |
These verbs are typically verbs of movement or location. Some of them are ambiguous, having an unaccusative sense and an agentive sense. For example, the verb sit can simply mean ‘be situated in a particular location’ (perhaps with a particular orientation), as in (8d), or it can mean ‘to adopt a posture in which most weight is supported by the rear end’ as in (9):
| (9) | Sam sat on the sofa |
In this usage, the verb is not unaccusative as it involves an agent argument: only something which is capable of volitional action can ‘sit’ in this sense, but virtually anything that is capable of being located can ‘sit’ in the unaccusative sense.
Unaccusative verbs have a certain range of properties by which we can identify them. One is that they may appear in there sentences, which we have mentioned several times in the previous chapters. These have a there subject and the theme argument sits behind the verb (and must be indefinite):
| (10) | a | there arrived a letter |
| b | there departed a train | |
| c | there spread a disease | |
| d | there sat a table in the corner | |
| e | etc. |
We will have more to say about the analysis of this structure later, but for now we will simply note it for its diagnostic use.
Note that agentive verbs cannot be used in this construction:
| (11) | there sat a man on the chair |
This sentence can only be interpreted as having the man situated on the chair and not with him performing the action of sitting. Compare the following:
| (12) | a | a man deliberately sat on the chair |
| b | *there deliberately sat a man on the chair |
Another structure in which we find unaccusatives is known as the locative inversion construction. This involves the PP locative argument apparently sitting in subject position, while the DP theme again sits behind the verb:
| (13) | a | [from platform 9] departed a train to Minsk |
| b | [in the corner] sat a shadowy figure | |
| c | [down the walls] ran some muddy water |
Like the there construction, locative inversion seems to be available only for unaccusative verbs and cannot be used with other verbs which have locative arguments or adjuncts:
| (14) | a | *[on the table] put he the book |
| b | *[in the garden] smiled a boy | |
| c | *[on the chair] deliberately sat a man |
It is not entirely clear that the PP in these structures occupies the subject position as it can be combined with a there subject:
| (15) | a | [from platform 9] there departed a train to Minsk |
| b | [in the corner] there sat a shadowy figure | |
| c | [down the walls] there ran some muddy water |
For the time being, however, we will not worry about the complexities of the analysis of this particular structure, but again use its presence as a diagnostic for unaccusative verbs.
Another distinguishing fact about unaccusatives is that they do not take objects of any kind. You might wonder how this fact distinguishes unaccusatives from intransitives which also do not have objects, but the fact is that intransitives may appear with a limited set of objects:
| (16) | a | he smiled a rueful smile |
| b | she laughed an evil laugh | |
| c | they died a mysterious death |
These objects are clearly strongly related to the verb themselves and are called cognate objects. Unaccusative verbs, however, do not take cognate objects:
| (17) | a | *the letter arrived an arrival |
| b | *the magician appeared an appearance | |
| c | *the kettle sat a sit on the stove |
Apparent exceptions to this can probably be accounted for in terms of the ambiguity of the verb. For example:
| (18) | she lived an eventful life |
The verb to live can mean something similar to reside as in (19):
| (19) | she lived in Paris |
But it is clear that this is not what is meant in (18) and indeed it cannot have this meaning in the presence of a cognate object. Thus, when it has the meaning reside the verb cannot take a cognate object and this is precisely the meaning it has as an unaccusative:
| (20) | a | there lived Picts in the Highlands |
| b | *there lived a woman an eventful life |
Again, for the moment, we will not be concerned about why unaccusative verbs do not take cognate objects, but will use this as a diagnostic for determining whether a verb is unaccusative or not.
In the most straightforward case, ignoring the complexities of the there construction for the moment, the theme argument is always the subject. If there is a prepositional argument, this always appears behind the verb, presumably in complement position. Thus the simplest assumption we could make for the structure of a VP involving an unaccusative verb is:
| (21) |
Following the UTAH we might now claim to have discovered the position to which the theme Θ-role is assigned: the specifier of the VP.
It is important to point out at this stage that what we are looking at here is the VP at D-structure, i.e. prior to any movement process and not the complete analysis of a full sentence. We will see that this is more complex, involving more structure and a greater number of syntactic processes. In particular, it is common for the subject not to remain in the VP, but to move out into a higher position in the clause:
| (22) |
The position to which the subject moves is typically a nominative position and so we might assume that the movement has something to do with placing this argument in a Case position. The reason why these verbs are called ‘unaccusative’ is because unlike with transitive verbs, which share the possibility of having theme arguments, the theme of the unaccusative cannot normally remain inside the VP to receive accusative Case.
As far as the event structure is concerned, unaccusative verbs have a very simple interpretation involving a simple state or relationship between the theme argument and the location. To see this, compare the unaccusative and agentive use of sit again:
| (23) | a | the water sat on the work surface |
| b | the old man sat (himself) on the chair |
In (23a) the event expressed simply involves the relationship between the water and the work surface, i.e. that the water was on the work surface. In (23b) on the other hand, the event involves the old man doing something which results in him being situated on the chair. Thus the two can be analysed in the following way:
| (24) | a | e = e1 | : e1 = ‘the water was on the work surface’ |
| b | e = e1 → e2 | : e1 = ‘the old man did something’ | |
| e2 = ‘the old man was on the chair’ |
The simple event structure corresponds with the simple VP structure of the unaccusative. We will see that more complex event structures lead to more complex VPs.