Selected Papers from the Fourteenth International ... - STIBA Malang

164 Bettelou Los
(diary/scandal, old quarrels, past), reckon (bill), root (sb), scare (game),
scout (clients), (dog) scratch (bone), show (fraud, ignorance/rogue, impostor),
turn (facts in an encyclopedia). (Lipka 1972: 206–207)
The same phenomenon of the unselected object is seen in complex predication:
cases in which V + predicate select a different set of objects than V would
do on its own. An example is (7b) above: them does not have the same thematic
relationship to cook as the objects have that cook selects outside of a resultative
construction: a meal etc. Other examples are presented in (13):
(13) a. They drank the pub dry (Spencer & Zaretskaya 1998).
b. The bears frightened the daylights out of the campers (McIntyre 2001: 144)
c. I beat the dust out of the sofa (McIntyre 2001: 144)
d. He worked his fingers to the bone.
2. .2 Idiomaticity
The idiomaticity of phrasal verbs, and their very variable degrees of transparency
and productivity, is often noted in the literature (e.g., Lüdeling 2001; see also the
findings in Biber et al. 1999: 412–413). What is less well known is that they share
these features with complex predicates: pry and come will only combine with
complex predicates that mean something like ‘apart,’ drive will only combine with
complex predicates denoting “negative and extreme mental states” (Goldberg &
Jackendoff 2004: 559):
(14) a. He pried it apart/open/loose/free/*flat/*straight
b. It came apart/open/loose/free/*flat/*straight
(Goldberg & Jackendoff 2004: 559)
(15) a. He drove her crazy/nuts/bananas/to desperation/to drink/up the wall/
meshuga/ frantic
b. *He drove her happy/sick/silly/clean/calm/thin/sober
(Goldberg & Jackendoff 2004: 559)
2. . Telicity
Another insight from Goldberg & Jackendoff ’s (2004) article is that resultative
complex predicates need not be telic. They distinguish four types of complex predicate
(538, 540):
(16) a. Noncausative property resultative (e.g., The pond froze solid)
Syntax: NP 1 V AP/PP 2
Semantics: X 1 BECOME Y 2
MEANS: [verbal subevent]
b. Causative property resultative (e.g., Willy watered the plants flat)
Syntax: NP 1 V NP 2 AP 3
Semantics: X 1 CAUSE [Y 2 BECOME Z 3 ]
MEANS: [verbal subevent, here: Willy watered the plants]