The Category P Features, Projections, Interpretation
The Category P Features, Projections, Interpretation The Category P Features, Projections, Interpretation
105 In the absence of [Acc], the default P C realized by be- has to be used, as the verb can no longer check the Case feature of the nominal. Further, since the Experiencer cluster ([-c+m]) is not marked with the mapping index, and the Theme cluster ([-c-m]) is marked as internal, the Experiencer is mapped externally (see 3.2.3 and Reinhart 2000)), as shown in (A.14): (A.14) rabim [-c+m] xošdim be-dan [-c-m] 2 many suspect in-Dan “Many people suspect Dan.” The proposal so far accounts for the fact that xašad (‘suspected’) is not an Accusative assigning verb, although its internal cluster is fully specified. The question which still remains is why the corresponding Russian (and possibly English) verb is an Accusative verb. I propose that podozreval (Russian) and suspect (English) have the same thetagrid as the causative Hebrew entry hexšid (A.12), rather than that of xašad, namely: [+c] 1 [-c-m] 2 Acc [-c+m]. I propose further that the difference between Hebrew on the one hand, and English and Russian on the other hand, is the status of the [+c] cluster. It is lexically active in the former, but lexically frozen (i.e. never realized) in the latter (see Reinhart 2000 for additional examples). As opposed to Hebrew, ‘suspect’ in Russian and English is not a result of reduction, but rather of the non-realization of the frozen [+c] cluster. The presence of the (frozen) [+c] in the theta-grid of ‘suspect’ in English/Russian gives rise to the [Acc] marking of the discussed verb in these languages.
106 Appendix B Table 1. 70 Hebrew PP-verbs and their translation into Russian and English. Remarks: (i) The gloss of Hebrew Ps: be- (‘in’, ‘with’); al (‘on’); le- (‘to’ – Dative, Directional); el (‘to’, Directional); me- (‘from’, ‘of’). (ii) If neither P nor Case are specified, the verb assigns Accusative in Russian. Hebrew English Russian 1. ba’at (be-) kicked 2. xavat (be-) beaten, stroked bil po (‘on’) 3. halam (be-) beaten, stroked barabanil po (‘on’) 4. hika (be-) beat, hit bil po (‘on’) 5. naga (be-) touched dotronuls y a do (‘to’) 6. tamax (be-) supported, endorsed podderžival 7. baxar (be-) chose vibral 8. nazaf (be-) scolded, reproached vigovoril Dat 9. hifcir (be-) pleaded with molil 10. tipel (be-) dealt with, treated zanimals y a-Instr 11. he’ic (be-) prompted toropil 12. xibel (be-) tempered with, sabotaged vredil Dat 13. alav (be-) Insulted obidel 14. paga (be-) hit, hurt, insulted, damaged popal v (‘in’), obidel 15. bagad (be-) betrayed izmenil Dat 16. šita (be-) made fool of 17. rada (be-) behaved like a tyran gospodstvoval nad (‘above’) 18. šalat (al) governed, ruled vlastvoval nad (‘above’) 19. šalat (be-) mastered vladel Instr 20. gaval (be-) bordered with groničil s (‘with’) 21. xalaš (al) [was] located above 22. hiškif (al) overlooked 23. hišpi’a (al) influenced, affected povliyal na (‘on’) 24. iyem (al) threatened ugrožal Dat 25. pakad (al) ordered prikazal Dat 26. asar (al) forbid zapretil Dat 27. he’emin (be-) believed (in) veril v (‘in’) 28. batax (be-) trusted doveral Dat 29. nitla (be-) depended (on) zavisel ot (‘from’) 30. xašad (be-) suspected podozreval 31. pikpek (b-) doubted, questioned somnevals y a v (‘in’)
- 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 and 118: 98 would be [-c] PP-verbs in Englis
- Page 119 and 120: 100 Appendix A: Residual issues The
- Page 121 and 122: 102 (A.6) a. mabat-o nadad (motion)
- Page 123: 104 Given its theta-grid, hikša is
- 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
- Page 169 and 170: 150 4.4.1 Evidence for the Small Cl
- Page 171 and 172: 152 4.4.2 Projections of a Locative
- Page 173 and 174: 154 (81) a. on pologayets y a na Sa
106<br />
Appendix B<br />
Table 1. 70 Hebrew PP-verbs and their translation into Russian and English.<br />
Remarks: (i) <strong>The</strong> gloss of Hebrew Ps: be- (‘in’, ‘with’); al (‘on’); le- (‘to’ – Dative, Directional); el<br />
(‘to’, Directional); me- (‘from’, ‘of’). (ii) If neither P nor Case are specified, the verb assigns<br />
Accusative in Russian.<br />
Hebrew English Russian<br />
1. ba’at (be-) kicked<br />
2. xavat (be-) beaten, stroked bil po (‘on’)<br />
3. halam (be-) beaten, stroked barabanil po (‘on’)<br />
4. hika (be-) beat, hit bil po (‘on’)<br />
5. naga (be-) touched dotronuls y a do (‘to’)<br />
6. tamax (be-) supported, endorsed podderžival<br />
7. baxar (be-) chose vibral<br />
8. nazaf (be-) scolded, reproached vigovoril Dat<br />
9. hifcir (be-) pleaded with molil<br />
10. tipel (be-) dealt with, treated zanimals y a-Instr<br />
11. he’ic (be-) prompted toropil<br />
12. xibel (be-) tempered with, sabotaged vredil Dat<br />
13. alav (be-) Insulted obidel<br />
14. paga (be-) hit, hurt, insulted, damaged popal v (‘in’), obidel<br />
15. bagad (be-) betrayed izmenil Dat<br />
16. šita (be-) made fool of<br />
17. rada (be-) behaved like a tyran gospodstvoval nad<br />
(‘above’)<br />
18. šalat (al) governed, ruled vlastvoval nad (‘above’)<br />
19. šalat (be-) mastered vladel Instr<br />
20. gaval (be-) bordered with groničil s (‘with’)<br />
21. xalaš (al) [was] located above<br />
22. hiškif (al) overlooked<br />
23. hišpi’a (al) influenced, affected povliyal na (‘on’)<br />
24. iyem (al) threatened ugrožal Dat<br />
25. pakad (al) ordered prikazal Dat<br />
26. asar (al) forbid zapretil Dat<br />
27. he’emin (be-) believed (in) veril v (‘in’)<br />
28. batax (be-) trusted doveral Dat<br />
29. nitla (be-) depended (on) zavisel ot (‘from’)<br />
30. xašad (be-) suspected podozreval<br />
31. pikpek (b-) doubted, questioned somnevals y a v (‘in’)
Change language