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.

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.

cognate object

objects that are strongly related to the verb (mostly intransitive), usually they repeat the meaning of the verb: smile an evil smile, live a happy life.

deverbal noun

a noun derived from a verb, e.g. a bite from the verb to bite.

event structure

verbs can express simple or complex events. Event structure describes what sub-events an event expressed by a certain verb is made up of. This has an effect on the syntactic organisation of elements within the VP. There is supposed to be an isomorphism between event structure and the structure of the VP: a VP breaks up into sub-vPs/VPs in a one-to-one correspondence with the sub-events.

experiencer

one of the thematic or theta-roles where the argument experiences some physical or mental state, like Mary in Mary was afraid of dogs. The experiencer theta-role is assigned in the specifier position of vP, similarly to the agent role. If both an agent and an experiencer argument are selected by the verb there are two vPs projected and the experiencer occupies the specifier position of the lower vP.

intransitive verb

a verb without a nominal complement (the object), e.g. ski. Its subject is either an agent or an experiencer, i.e. one of the theta-roles assigned to the specifier of a vP. Occasionally intransitive verbs appear with a cognate object.

language

a system that enables people who speak it to produce and understand linguistic expressions.

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

object

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

overt

visible, having phonological realisation

semantics

the study of meaning. It covers both lexical meaning and the meaning of sentences with special emphasis on their truth conditions (under what circumstances a sentence is true/false).

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.

unaccusative verb

a verb taking one argument to which it assigns a theme theta-role in the specifier position of a VP. They may also optionally take a location or path argument expressed by a PP. Some of the unaccusative verbs in English are arrive, appear, sit, they are typically verbs of movement or location. Unaccusative verbs can appear in the existential there construction or locative inversion structures. They do not take objects of any kind, see also cognate object.

previous next

Basic English Syntax with Exercises

5.2.5 Intransitive verbs

Intransitive verbs are verbs with one argument, but unlike unaccusatives this argument is either an agent or an experiencer, i.e. one of the Θ-roles assigned to the specifier of a light verb. Accordingly then, we may analyse them as involving the following structure:

(99)

The one argument will move to the subject position in order to get Case and presumably the verb will move to support the light verb.

Examples of intransitives are as follows:

(100)aSam smiled
bJerry danced
cRichard died
dStan slept

Recall that one mark of an intransitive verb, as opposed to an unaccusative, is its ability to take a cognate object:

(101)aSam smiled an evil smile
bJerry danced a merry dance
cRichard died a tragic death
dStan slept a restless sleep

Given the structure in (101) a number of possible analyses of cognate objects suggest themselves. One is to assume that these are like theme arguments, though obviously highly restricted by the thematic verb and hence they appear in the specifier of the VP and end up behind the verb when it raises to the light verb position:

(102)

From this perspective, the only difference between a cognate object and a normal object is the restricted semantic relationship that holds between the cognate object and the intransitive verb. Another possible analysis suggests itself through the similarity between intransitive verbs with cognate objects and light verbs with deverbal noun complements:

(103)ahe smiled a smile=he smiled
bhe took a peep=he peeped

Perhaps then what a cognate object is, is not a virtually meaningless repetition of the verb as is standardly assumed, but the main predicative element in the sentence and it is the verb which has a reduced ‘light’ meaning. This analysis has possibilities, but we will not follow it up further.

If we analyse intransitives as involving a light verb, the question arises as to why we cannot passivise an intransitive:

(104)a*it was smiled by Sam
b*it was died by Richard

This is quite mysterious given our previous analysis of the passive. However, it should be noted that the inability to passivise intransitives is a language particular fact and not a universal truth about intransitives. German intransitive verbs, for example, can passivise:

(104) Es wurde getanzt
   it   was     danced
   ‘there was dancing’

This at least shows that in principle passivisation is not incompatible with intransitives and that the reason why intransitives cannot passivise in English must therefore be due to some other particular property of the language. Note that unaccusatives do not passivise in any language:

(106) *it was arrived (by the letter)
   
(107)aIn de zomer wordt er hier vaak gezwommen.
In the summer is it here frequently swum
‘In the summer, there is frequently swimming here’
b*In de zomer wordt er hier vaak verdronken.
In the summer is it here frequently drowned
‘In the summer, there is frequently drowning here’

This is to be expected given our analysis of the passive and the fact that unaccusatives do not involve light verbs.

The event structure of intransitives is also a little problematic as we predict it to be complex if intransitives involve light verbs, but a sentence like Sam smiled does not obviously express a complex event structure. However, it is not impossible to think of this as involving a situation in which Sam does something which results in a smile, which is made more plausible by comparison with the overt light verb construction:

(108)aSam smiled
bSam did a smile

If intransitives are in fact formed from an underlying structure involving a ‘cognate object’ and a light verb as suggested above, then the parallel between (108a) and (b) is even stronger. We might therefore propose the following analysis of the event structure:

(109)e = e1 → e2: e1 = ‘Sam did something’
  e2 = ‘there was a smile’

In all then the analysis of intransitives is relatively unproblematic.

previous next