The Category P Features, Projections, Interpretation
The Category P Features, Projections, Interpretation The Category P Features, Projections, Interpretation
99 check the Case of their nominal complement, rather than to divide them into two groups.
100 Appendix A: Residual issues The analysis I have proposed for the phenomenon of PP-verbs accounts for the vast majority of these verbs. There are, however, verbs which present difficulties and therefore deserve some particular attention. I. PP-verbs of motion The verbs hibit, histakel (‘glanced at’, ‘looked at’) and yara (‘shot at’) are classified here as [-c] verbs. However, they differ in two respects from the majority of [-c] PP-verbs discussed in this study. First, these verbs occur in Hebrew with either be- (‘in’/‘at’) or al (‘on’). This is completely atypical of PP-verbs, which occur with one specific P-morpheme. 66 In English they occur with the P-morpheme at, which is also quite unique to these verbs. Second, in addition to their occurrence with the small Ps be-/al, these verbs can occur with various locative PPs (e.g. hu hibit mitaxat la-šulxan (‘he looked under the table’)), similarly to locative verbs such as put. In what follows I will focus mostly on this peculiarity. Consider the following binding facts. When the discussed verbs occur with the small Ps be-/al, the binding facts are those exhibited by PP-verbs, namely the nominal introduced by the P has to be reflexive, if coindexed with the subject (A.1). However, when they occur with a locative PP the binding facts are those exhibited with locative verbs such as put (see chapter 4, and Hestvik 1991), a pronoun introduced by the locative P can be coreferential with the subject (A.2): (A.1) hu i hibit al/be-acmo i / *al-av i / *bo i / he looked on/in-himself/on-him/in+him (A.2) hu i hibit *sviv acmo i /sviv-o i /??mitaxat le-acmo i //mitaxt-av i he looked around himself/around-him/under to-himself/under-him 66 The be-/al alternation is accompanied by some semantic difference with the verb yara (‘shot’); e.g. yariti ba-naxaš (‘I shot the snake’), implies that the snake was hit; yariti al ha-naxaš (‘I shot at the snake’), does not imply that the snake was hit.
- Page 67 and 68: 48 (13) Internal argument-taking hi
- Page 69 and 70: 50 Grimshaw 1990; Baker 1988, 1997;
- Page 71 and 72: 52 suitable for the problem at hand
- Page 73 and 74: 54 3.2.3 The mapping generalization
- Page 75 and 76: 56 (iii) Assignment of [Acc] depend
- Page 77 and 78: 58 (25) a. on našol konfet-u v kar
- Page 79 and 80: 60 theory of P developed in chapter
- Page 81 and 82: 62 (37) a. What did he eat in the m
- Page 83 and 84: 64 Thus, whatever the exact restric
- Page 85 and 86: (46). 28 Summarizing the above, P C
- Page 87 and 88: 68 As for the alleged arbitrariness
- Page 89 and 90: 70 3.4 The [-m]/[-c] distinction Th
- Page 91 and 92: 72 viewed as necessary conditions f
- Page 93 and 94: 74 (59) [-c] PP-verbs Physical cont
- Page 95 and 96: 76 interpreted only as undergoing a
- Page 97 and 98: 78 b. dan [he’if mabat] be-rina D
- Page 99 and 100: 80 a [+animate] DP. Consequently, h
- Page 101 and 102: 82 The meaning of (78a) is somethin
- Page 103 and 104: 84 (85) a. he’emanti be-bart [I]
- Page 105 and 106: 86 asserted ‘belief’. In other
- Page 107 and 108: 88 3.5 PP-verbs cross-linguisticall
- Page 109 and 110: 90 But the non-identical realizatio
- Page 111 and 112: 92 P device involves the syntactic
- Page 113 and 114: 94 Note that the options in (103) d
- Page 115 and 116: 96 adjacency requirement between th
- Page 117: 98 would be [-c] PP-verbs in Englis
- Page 121 and 122: 102 (A.6) a. mabat-o nadad (motion)
- Page 123 and 124: 104 Given its theta-grid, hikša is
- Page 125 and 126: 106 Appendix B Table 1. 70 Hebrew P
- Page 127 and 128: 108 Table 2. Some properties of the
- Page 129 and 130: 110 67. serev (le-) [+c+m] [-c] - +
- Page 131 and 132: 112 4. Locative, Directional and Da
- Page 133 and 134: 114 is distinct from both the Dativ
- Page 135 and 136: 116 Let me illustrate briefly the e
- Page 137 and 138: 118 inability of the Dative PP to d
- Page 139 and 140: 120 In principle, (16) can have eit
- Page 141 and 142: 122 from natan, but from the embedd
- Page 143 and 144: 124 Both (22a) and (22b) are possib
- Page 145 and 146: 126 (ii) Binding In the Hebrew Dati
- Page 147 and 148: 128 Let us assume that in (29a) the
- Page 149 and 150: 130 4.3 The Directional P Zwarts an
- Page 151 and 152: 132 (36) a. dan šalax praxim (le-r
- Page 153 and 154: 134 The incompatibility of Dative p
- Page 155 and 156: 136 (45) ha-tiyul le-hodu haya me
- Page 157 and 158: 138 rather an (elided) NP modified
- Page 159 and 160: 140 Consider now the English and Ru
- Page 161 and 162: 142 the Accusative Case in (56) is
- Page 163 and 164: 144 Modification by possessive dati
- Page 165 and 166: 146 use (63c), me- (‘from’) def
- Page 167 and 168: 148 combination with a path denotin
99<br />
check the Case of their nominal complement, rather than to divide them into two<br />
groups.
Change language