The Category P Features, Projections, Interpretation

Abstract
1. Introduction (chapter 1)
In the early stages of the development of linguistic theory, the category P
(preposition/postposition) was viewed as syntactically insignificant. Ps were analyzed
mostly as a kind of appendage to the NP (nominal phrase), rather than a syntactic
category on its own (Ross 1967, Fillmore 1968, Postal 1971).
Since Jackendoff (1973, 1977) P is standardly assumed to be an independent
syntactic head. The recognition of P as a syntactic category triggered various studies
which revealed that this category exhibits an unparalleled range of syntactic and
semantic diversity.
The set of roles PPs (prepositional phrases) play is substantially larger than the
set of roles played by any other type of phrase, lexical or functional. A PP can serve
as an argument: either as an internal argument of certain verbs or nouns (1a,b,c) or as
a subject (1d); a PP can also be a (across copula) predicate (2a) or a modifier, either
verbal or nominal (2b,c):
(1) a. Bart put the book in the drawer.
b. I cannot rely on this drawer.
c. John’s belief in ghosts…/ the destruction of the city…
d. Under the table is a good hiding place.
(2) a. The book is on the table.
b. Dan ate in the garden.
c. The book under the table is not mine.
Unlike any other functional or lexical head, the possible complements taken by
Ps vary from nominal (3a) to clausal (3b) (verbal, in Grimshaw’s (1991) extended
projection sense), and from argumental (e.g. DP) to predicative (e.g. AP) ((4a) vs.
(4b)):
(3) a. dan higi’a axarey ha-mesiba
Dan arrived after the-party