The Category P Features, Projections, Interpretation

84
(85) a. he’emanti be-bart
[I] believed in-Bart
b. he’emanti be-(*ezrat) bart 51
[I] believed in-help Bart
Intended meaning: I believed with Bart.
The clear contrast in grammaticality between the (a) and the (b) sentences in (83)-(85)
comes as no surprise. [-m] PP-verbs assign neither an Agent theta-role nor a Cause
role (which can be interpreted as Agent). Therefore there can be no [+c-m] thetacluster
(Instrument) in their theta-grid.
I conclude that /c of the internal theta-cluster of these verbs is not specified /+.
In the following subsection I will show that the value of /c is not negatively specified
either, thereby establishing the claim that it is indeed a [-m] cluster.
3.4.4.3 [-m] vs. [-c-m]: Although the distinction between these two roles seems
clear (i.e. [-m] can be interpreted as the cause, whereas [-c-m] cannot), sometimes the
two roles are not easily distinguished. Consider the following examples:
(86) dan ohev et yosi
Dan loves Acc Yosi
(87) dan ma’amin be-yosi
Dan believes in-Yosi
The verbs ohev (‘loves’) and ma’amin (‘believes (in)’) are similar in some respect.
They are both psych verbs, thus their external theta-role is [-c+m] (or [+m]). 52 The
goal of the present discussion is to show that they differ with respect to their internal
theta-role.
51 Since the small P occurring with the PP-verb ma’amin (‘believe’) is be-, I use the complex be-ezrat
(lit. ‘in-help’, meaning: ‘with the means of’) in (85b) in order to force the Instrumental reading of the
internal argument of ma’amin (‘believe’).
52 The external cluster of Subject Experiencer verbs such as ohev (‘loves’) is identified as [+m] in
Reinhart 2001, rather than [-c+m]. At least partially, this is motivated by theory-internal considerations.
More specifically, if the Experiencer cluster was [-c+m], verbs such as love, lacking a [+] theta-cluster,
would not be able to be marked with the [Acc] feature, contrary to facts.