Eckhard Bick - VISL

Another argument in favour of the @SUBJ reading in absolute participle
constructions is that they resemble @SC participles after ’estar’. Both types of
participles allow only transitive and ergative verbs, not intransitive inergative verbs.
And both predicate something of a patient subject. As a matter of fact, for ergative
verbs, the @SUBJ of an absolute participle construction corresponds to the subject, not
the object, of the corresponding finite clause:
(2) sumido @#ICL-ADVL> o bandido @ sumiu, e as vítimas se consolaram
Superficially, the participle construction in (3a) resembles that in (3b), with a PP
replacing the NP to the right of the participle. However, the participle in (3b) has a clear
dependency relation, corroborated by agreement, to the main clause's subject, a pintura.
The semantic role patient of the participle is situated outside the participle structure
itself!
Within my range of function tags, the most sensible reading in (3b) is that of
free subject predicative (@PRED), listing this case under the heading of "adjectivelike"
participles.
(3a) E @CO arrancada @#ICL-ADVL> a @>N chave @