The Category P Features, Projections, Interpretation

65
(46) V [ PP P DP]
A potential weakness of the PP-extraposition argument lies in the fact that Ps in
Dutch are not affixal, as opposed to Hebrew, where phonologically small Ps can be
affixal (see chapters 4 and 5 for the analysis of the Hebrew preposition le- (‘to’)).
Thus, as far as Hebrew PP-verbs are concerned, the PP-extraposition test may seem
not convincing enough, and an independent test that distinguishes between a DP and a
PP in Hebrew is needed in order to establish the category of the P DP sequence.
Fortunately, such a test exists.
As noted in Landau (1994), only conjoined DPs allow either one adjectival
modifier or two modifiers, as shown in (47). Conjoined PPs allow only the latter, as
shown in (48). Most significantly, modification of conjoined P DP sequences with one
modifier is ungrammatical in PP-verb construction (49a):
(47) a. dan pagaš et ha-yeled ha-xadaš ve-et ha-yalda ha-xadaša
Dan met Acc the-boy the-new-sg.ms. and-Acc the-girl the-new-sg.fem.
b. dan pagaš et ha-yeled ve-et ha-yalda ha-xadašim
Dan met Acc the-boy and-Acc the-girl the-new-pl.
(48) *dan kiven et ha-ekdax la-em ve-le-bna ha-mefuxadim
Dan pointed Acc the-gun to+the-mother and-to-son+her the-frightened-pl.
(49) a. *dan somex rak al ha-menahel ve-al ha-axayot ha-menusim
Dan relies only on the-director and-on the-nurses the-experienced-pl.
b. dan somex rak al ha-menahel ha-menuse ve-al ha-axayot ha-menusot
Dan relies only on the-director the-experienced and-on the-nurses the-experienced
“Dan relies only on the experienced director and the experienced nurses.”