The Category P Features, Projections, Interpretation

63
syntactic head, but rather part of the verbal one. Therefore up, by itself, does not form
a constituent with the following DP. The absence of such constituent underlies the
ungrammaticality of (40b). On the assumption that the P-morpheme al (’on’) in (39)
is not part of the verbal head, but rather forms a constituent with the following DP, the
grammaticality of (39b) follows.
The constituency of the P DP sequence is further demonstrated in (41), where
the sequence is topicalized:
(41) al lisa, bart somex
On Lisa, Bart relies
The P-DP constituency indicates that (34) is untenable (i.e. P is not a verbal
particle). It does not entail, however, that the constituent is necessarily a PP; P in this
sequence can be analyzed as a Case-marker adjoined to the DP, as in (35). In order to
eliminate this possibility, additional evidence is presented below.
Williams (1980) argues that a (secondary) predicate has to be c-commanded by
its subject. Neeleman (1997) observes that secondary predication of the indirect object
in PP-verb constructions is infelicitous (42a), contrasting with secondary predication
of the direct object (42b). In (42b) the depictive AP can be predicated of both the
subject and the direct object, whereas in (42a) it can be predicated only of the subject.
Given the c-command restriction (Williams 1980), this observation is accounted for,
if there is a PP above the relevant DP:
(42) a. bart hibit be-lisa šikor/*šikora
Bart looked in-Lisa drunk-ms./*fem.
b. bart ra’a et lisa šikor/šikora
Bart saw Acc Lisa drunk-ms./fem.
The picture, however, appears to be more complex. Maling (2001) provides
examples where secondary predication of the indirect object (object of P) is possible
((14a,b) in Maling 2001):
(43) a. The brain surgeon had to operate on the patient wide-awake.
b. The perverted orderly liked to look at female patients nude.