The Category P Features, Projections, Interpretation

148
combination with a path denoting head, resulting in a complex predicate. The binding
facts exhibited in the Directional constructions in English and Russian led me to
conclude that the Directional (Goal) P in these languages (to, k) is not a predicate (P C );
its Directional meaning comes from the selecting lexical head.
4.4 Locative Ps
In the previous sections I mentioned the locative construction headed by verbs
such as put, placed and located, where the occurrence of Locative PPs is obligatory.
This will be the starting point of this section as well. Additional occurrences of Locative
PPs will be discussed as we proceed.
As already mentioned, based on the binding facts (68), the Locative P is a
predicate. The pronoun introduced by P and coindexed with the subject is grammatical.
In “Reflexivity”, this indicates that the verb and the Locative P are separate independent
predicates.
(68) bart i sam et ha-sukarya leyad-o i /*leyad acmo i
Bart put Acc the-candy near-him/near himself
Further, the obligatory occurrence of an anaphor coindexed with the object (69)
shows that P is reflexive marked, and hence a reflexive predicate (condition A in
“Reflexivity”). Under “Reflexivity” this means that P should have a subject (see 3.1).
(69) af exad lo yaxol lasim xefec i al acmo i /leyad acmo i //*al-av i /*leyad-o i
No-one not can put object on itself/near itself//on-it/near-it
(Oren Beit-Arie 1994)
If a verb like put is a three-place verb, with two internal arguments, Theme (DP)
and Location (PP), xefec (‘object’) in (69) is the direct object of the verb (cf. Marantz
1984, Hestvik 1991, Van Riemsdijk 1998), rather than the subject of P. This view has
two structural realizations: a Larsonian VP-shell, the lower part of which is actually a
verbal small clause (SC), schematacized in (70a) (Larson 1988; Hale and Keyser 1996,