abstract Case

being Case-marked is assumed to be a universal property of overt nominal expressions. Whenever there is no visible marking, we assume there to be invisible Case on the given nominal expression.

accusative Case

the case of DPs appearing after verbs, prepositions and visible subjects of infinitival clauses. In English it is visible only on certain pronouns, e.g. him/her.

active voice

a structure with no passivisation, where the subject of the clause does not originate in the object position but in the specifier position of the vP. Compare with passive voice, see also voice.

agent

one of the thematic or theta-roles, where the argument deliberately performs an action, as Jamie in Jamie sang a song or Robert in Robert kicked the cat. In terms of the UTAH the agentive theta-role is assigned to the specifier position of vP, similarly to experiencer arguments.

arguments

the participants minimally involved in an action defined by the predicate. The complements and the subject, the latter also called an external argument.

bound morpheme

a morpheme that has to attach to another morpheme, it cannot stand on its own, e.g. ed, ment, un . See also free morpheme

Burzio’s Generalisation

verbs which assign no theta-role to their subjects do not assign accusative Case to their objects.

Case position

a position where (nominative or accusative) Case can be assigned.

generative grammar

a grammar containing rules with the help of which we can generate all and only the well-formed expressions of a language (therefore excluding the ungrammatical structures).

light verb

a verb occupying the head of a vP used in combination with another element, typically a noun or verb, where the light verb’s contribution to the meaning of the whole construction is less than that of a fully thematic main verb, e.g. to take a shower=to shower. Certain verbs expressing aspectual (be, have) or modal (let) meaning also belong here. According to the proposals in the present book the following constituents can appear within the vP in a visible or abstract form (see also vP-shells):

– agentive arguments in the specifier positions

– experiencer arguments in the specifier position

– goal arguments in the double-object construction as specifiers

– the passive -en morpheme in the head of vP

– the aspectual morphemes -en and -ing in the head of vP

– the tense morpheme in the head of vP

missing subject

in terms of the EPP every clause must have a subject, so clauses cannot have a missing subject. In certain structures it seems to be the case, however, it can be argued that these clauses only have a missing visible subject, there is an abstract element occupying the subject position in these clauses as well, either in the form of a trace or PRO.

morpheme

the smallest meaningful unit. Words can be made up of one or more morphemes. See also bound morpheme, free morpheme.

object

a DP complement immediately following the verb. It can move to the subject position in passive sentences. See also direct object, indirect object.

object position

the specifier position of VP.

passive structure

a verb with the -en ending often (but not always) preceded by an inflected form of be. Passive verbs do not have a vP-projection  similar to vPs in active structures. The vP in passives is headed by the passive -en morpheme which does not assign theta role to the subject and for this reason it is unable to case-mark its nominal complement (see Burzio’s Generalisation), so the DP has to move from its base-position to a Case-position.

patient

one of the thematic or theta-roles where the argument is affected by the action described by the verb, e.g. in Peter stroked the cat the cat is directly affected by this activity.

specifier position

a position defined by X-bar Theory. The specifier is sister to X', daughter of XP. It is a phrasal position, the nature of the phrase depends on what it is the specifier of. E.g. the specifier of IP is the subject, the specifier of DP is the possessor in possessive structures.

subject position

the position where subjects appear in the tree. The base position of the subject depends on its theta role. Agents and experiencers are generated in Spec,vP. Theme subjects appear in Spec,VP. These positions are not Case positions, so the subjects move to the canonical subject position, Spec, IP.

theme

one of the thematic roles where the argument is not affected by the action described by the verb e.g. in Peter saw John nothing directly happens to John as a result of being seen. In terms of the UTAH the theme theta-role is assigned to the specifier position of the VP.

there-construction: see existential there-construction.

theta role

the semantic role of the participants as required by the predicate. E.g. verbs define what kind of semantic relationship is to be established between the verb itself and the arguments of the verb, and arguments are selected accordingly. The verb kick calls for an agent subject, so its subject position cannot be occupied by e.g. my CD-player.

Uniform Theta-role Assignment Hypothesis (UTAH)

a Θ-role is assigned in the same structural position in all structures in which it is present.

previous next

Basic English Syntax with Exercises

5.2.4.1 Evidence from passives

There is some evidence that the correct structure should be something like (74) however. This comes from the fact that transitive verbs can undergo passivisation. When a verb is passivised, it loses its agent and the object becomes the subject:

(77)aMark made the bed–the bed was made
bHarry hit Bill–Bill was hit
cRichard write the letter–the letter was written

Even under a less strict view of the UTAH than we are attempting to keep to here, one would like to assume that the object is generated in the same place in active sentences and their passive counterparts. This has been the assumption since the beginning of generative grammar in the 1950s. Thus, the object is generated in object position in the passive, but moves to the subject position. Presumably the only reason it would do this is to get Case. Thus while in the active structure the object gets Case in object position, this ceases to be a Case position in the passive and hence not only does a passive verb lose its subject, it also loses the accusative Case assigned to its object. Again, these are fairly standard assumptions about the analysis of the passive which have been proposed since the 1980s.

Interestingly, the passive is a construction which conforms to Burzio’s generalisation: the verb stops assigning a Θ-role to its subject and loses the ability to assign accusative to its object. But Burzio’s generalisation is a description of a state of affairs, it is not an explanation of that state of affairs. What we need is something that links the two properties. In previous examples we have seen a way to link the Θ-role assignment to the subject and the accusative Case assignment to the object: through the light verb which is assumed to do both:

(78)

If the light verb ceased to be there, both the agent Θ-role and the accusative Case would be lost in one step. What would be left is the main verb with its patient argument which would lack Case and hence have to move to subject position:

(79)

Thus, if we analyse the passive construction as involving the loss of the light verb, we readily account for its two most salient properties.

We might extend this analysis to take into consideration other aspects of the passive construction. It has been argued that one of the central aspects of the passive is the appearance of the passive morpheme. The passive morpheme appears in all English passives, no matter what else happens. Thus, not all passives involve an object moving to subject position (80a), and while some passives contain a by phrase reintroducing the missing subject, not all do (80b). Furthermore, most passive constructions involve a passive auxiliary be, but not all (80c):

(80)ait is expected that Pete will post the letter
bthe letter will be posted (by Pete)
cI will expect [the letter posted by noon at the latest]

In all these examples however, the passive verb has the passive morpheme. We can incorporate this into our analysis of the passive making use of an idea presented above, that certain bound morphemes can be analysed as light verbs. Suppose we assume that the passive morpheme is a light verb which replaces the agentive light verb of the active. As the passive light verb does not assign a Θ-role to its subject, it will not be able to assign a Case to the theme in the specifier of the VP and hence this argument will have to move to subject position. Moreover, the bound morpheme status of the passive light verb will force the main verb to move in order to support it:

(81)

From this perspective, then, the analysis of the passive involves replacing the agentive light verb with a non-agentive passive light verb, most of the other aspects of the passive construction follow straightforwardly from this.

A crucial point to make at this point is that this analysis of the passive would simply be unavailable if we supposed that the structure of the active were to be (76) and not (74). Inasmuch as this analysis helps us to understand the passivisation process any better, then, it can be used as evidence in favour of the assumption of (74).

previous next