The Category P Features, Projections, Interpretation
The Category P Features, Projections, Interpretation The Category P Features, Projections, Interpretation
Thus, as far as Case is concerned, there is a clear distinction between P R and P C . While the function of P C , by definition, is to check structurally the Case feature of its nominal complement, the following characterizes Case assignment by P R : (i) The ability to assign Case is a property of individual P-morphemes realizing P R in a given language (e.g. in English: under vs. because). (ii) The Case assigned by P R is inherent (as defined in 2.1.3), its assignment does not involve feature checking. P pred , realized by particular small Ps (e.g. to), integrates one-place property denoting constituents (e.g. NP, VP) into the syntactic structure (12): (12) a. ha-sefer kal le-[ NP havana] the-book easy to-understanding The book is easy to [ VP understand]. b. dan hevi et ha-oto li-[ NP vdika] Dan brought Acc the-car to-repairing Dan brought the car to [ VP repair]. The proposal is supported by the detailed case studies and analyses of various constructions featuring P. 3. The support (chapters 3-5) Chapter 3 is a study of the P C function. The empirical array of the chapter is verbs whose internal argument is realized obligatorily as a PP (PP-verbs), rather than a DP (e.g. rely on, depend on). In the very few existing analyses of the phenomenon of PP-verbs, the function of Ps is claimed to be either Case-related (cf. Hestvik 1991), or theta-related (Neeleman 1997). These proposals prove unsatisfactory as they provide only partial explanations of the phenomenon, and do not answer the most intriguing question, why the phenomenon exists in the first place. Working primarily with a random sample of 70 Hebrew PP-verbs, and assuming the framework of the Theta System (Reinhart 2000), the phenomenon of PP-verbs is argued to follow from the hypothesis in (13): (13) The underspecification hypothesis The internal theta-role of PP-verbs is underspecified.
In the Theta System theta-roles are viewed as feature clusters, rather than as primitive, atomic notions. Two binary specified features are assumed to define thetaroles: [±c] (cause change) and [±m] (mental state involved). A fully specified thetarole is a feature cluster, all of whose features are specified (e.g. [+c+m], Agent). An underspecified theta-role is a feature cluster unspecified with regard to one of its features (e.g. [-c], Goal, the value of /m is not specified; [-m] Subject Matter, the value of /c is unspecified). Based on various familiar and new diagnostics, it is shown that the internal theta-role of the discussed verbs is indeed underspecified, either [-c] (Goal) or [-m] (Subject Matter), rather than any of the potential fully-specified ones (e.g. [-c-m] (Theme), [-c+m] (Experiencer)). This supports the validity of the hypothesis in (13). According to the Theta System, verbs whose internal theta-role is underspecified are not associated with the [Acc] (Accusative Case) feature, and therefore cannot check and delete the Case feature of their nominal argument. I propose that these verbs lexically select for a semantically appropriate small P, which checks the (structural) Case feature of their internal nominal argument. Thus, the occurrence of small Ps (realizing P C ) in the context of PP-verbs is motivated by the thematic properties of the verb, but it has consequences regarding the Case of the nominal. Based on evidence from Dutch and Hebrew, the small Ps in PP-verb constructions are shown to be syntactic P-heads, rather than verbal particles or Casemarkings on a DP. Ascribing the P C function to the prepositions occurring with PP-verbs derives the absence of locative semantics in PP-verb constructions (14a), Accusative Case in Russian (15a), and the binding facts attested in these constructions (16a): (14) a. Bart believes in love/*there. Compare: b. Bart lives in Tel Aviv/there. (15) a. Sacha verit v moyu te’ori-yu Sacha believes in my theory-Acc Compare: b. Sacha živet v Tel Aviv-e Sacha lives in Tel Aviv-Loc
- Page 1 and 2: Tel-Aviv University The Lester & Sa
- Page 3 and 4: Acknowledgements It has been a long
- Page 5 and 6: Abstract 1. Introduction (chapter 1
- Page 7 and 8: c. *Dan i talked about him i d. *Da
- Page 9: (9) The main hypothesis P is unifor
- Page 13 and 14: The (semantically limited) distribu
- Page 15 and 16: of the main verb, along lines propo
- Page 17 and 18: 3.2.2 The theta-features (Reinhart
- Page 19 and 20: 5.4.2.1 The status and function of
- Page 21 and 22: 2 1.1 Previous approaches to P 1.1.
- Page 23 and 24: 4 (5) a. dan higi’a axarey ha-mes
- Page 25 and 26: 6 b. misaviv *(le)-ec Hebrew around
- Page 27 and 28: 8 These approaches do depart from t
- Page 29 and 30: 10 heads such as N, V, A do not. 10
- Page 31 and 32: 12 To summarize, as it stands, Grim
- Page 33 and 34: 14 by the corresponding lexical hea
- Page 35 and 36: 16 In the Object Purpose Clause con
- Page 37 and 38: 18 2. The theory of P The main goal
- Page 39 and 40: 20 yes/no questions).This is comple
- Page 41 and 42: 22 (2) Criterion Functional categor
- Page 43 and 44: 24 In various languages some Ps are
- Page 45 and 46: 26 sharp contrast to the core lexic
- Page 47 and 48: 28 lexical, of course) (see the dis
- Page 49 and 50: 30 (iv) Froud 2001 is a psycholingu
- Page 51 and 52: 32 perspective, I will assume that
- Page 53 and 54: 34 Dutch provides an additional arg
- Page 55 and 56: 36 the study). Thus, taking the not
- Page 57 and 58: 38 On my proposal (section 2.2.1) m
- Page 59 and 60: 40 In this respect, let me note a p
Thus, as far as Case is concerned, there is a clear distinction between P R and P C .<br />
While the function of P C , by definition, is to check structurally the Case feature of its<br />
nominal complement, the following characterizes Case assignment by P R : (i) <strong>The</strong><br />
ability to assign Case is a property of individual P-morphemes realizing P R in a given<br />
language (e.g. in English: under vs. because). (ii) <strong>The</strong> Case assigned by P R is inherent<br />
(as defined in 2.1.3), its assignment does not involve feature checking.<br />
P pred , realized by particular small Ps (e.g. to), integrates one-place property<br />
denoting constituents (e.g. NP, VP) into the syntactic structure (12):<br />
(12) a. ha-sefer kal le-[ NP havana]<br />
the-book easy to-understanding<br />
<strong>The</strong> book is easy to [ VP understand].<br />
b. dan hevi et ha-oto li-[ NP vdika]<br />
Dan brought Acc the-car to-repairing<br />
Dan brought the car to [ VP repair].<br />
<strong>The</strong> proposal is supported by the detailed case studies and analyses of various<br />
constructions featuring P.<br />
3. <strong>The</strong> support (chapters 3-5)<br />
Chapter 3 is a study of the P C function. <strong>The</strong> empirical array of the chapter is<br />
verbs whose internal argument is realized obligatorily as a PP (PP-verbs), rather than<br />
a DP (e.g. rely on, depend on). In the very few existing analyses of the phenomenon<br />
of PP-verbs, the function of Ps is claimed to be either Case-related (cf. Hestvik 1991),<br />
or theta-related (Neeleman 1997). <strong>The</strong>se proposals prove unsatisfactory as they<br />
provide only partial explanations of the phenomenon, and do not answer the most<br />
intriguing question, why the phenomenon exists in the first place.<br />
Working primarily with a random sample of 70 Hebrew PP-verbs, and assuming<br />
the framework of the <strong>The</strong>ta System (Reinhart 2000), the phenomenon of PP-verbs is<br />
argued to follow from the hypothesis in (13):<br />
(13) <strong>The</strong> underspecification hypothesis<br />
<strong>The</strong> internal theta-role of PP-verbs is underspecified.
Change language