The Category P Features, Projections, Interpretation

154
(81) a. on pologayets y a na Sach-u PP-verb constr.
he relies on Sacha-Acc
b. on poyexal na konferenci-yu Directional constr.
he went on conference-Acc
“He went to the/a conference.”
Based on (80) and (81), a couple of arguably related observations can be made: (i)
Among the variety of semantically locative contexts (80), the locative construction
(80c) is exceptional. The Case of the DP introduced by the Locative P na (‘on’) is
Accusative, rather than Locative. Note that in this respect, the locative construction
patterns with PP-verbs and Directional constructions (81). (ii) The locative and
existential constructions differ with respect to the Case of the DP introduced by the
Locative P (i.e. Accusative vs. Locative). Recall that in these constructions the Locative
PP is assumed to be a predicate of a SC constituent.
The question arises as to why the Case in the locative construction (80c) is
Accusative.
Note that the locative verbs (e.g. put, place, locate) denote a change of location,
rather than a static location. Thus although these verbs are not path denoting verbs
(82a), the path meaning seems to be incorporated in their lexical semantics (Jackendoff
1990) (82b):
(82) a. *Dan put the book to the pocket.
b. Dan put the book in(to) the pocket.
If so, the occurrence of Accusative in the Locative construction can be accounted
for. I propose that the Locative SC in the locative construction (80c) includes a
phonetically empty counterpart of the Directional P (83).
(83) SC PP in the locative construction
…[ FP=SC DP ext P dir [ PP P loc DP int ]]
(corresponds to the SC in (79b))
This structure reflects Jackendovian representation of change of location verbs,
where a PATH predicate (P dir ) takes Location (Locative PP) as its complement