The Category P Features, Projections, Interpretation

76
interpreted only as undergoing an emotional episode (i.e. fear). The following pair
(suggested by Julia Horvath and Idan Landau p.c.) illustrates clearly the noted
difference between the two roles:
(63) #hu hifxid et rut, aval hi lo hirgiša paxad
He frightened Ruth, but she did not feel fear.
(64) hu iyem al rut, aval hi lo hirgiša me’uyemet
He threatened Ruth, but she did not feel threatened.
(63) is a contradiction, as the verb hifxid (‘frightened’) entails the mental state
(of fear) of its internal argument. In other words, the internal argument of hifxid has
the feature /+m. Negating the entailment results in a contradiction. (64) is not a
contradiction indicating clearly that the verb iyem (‘threatened’) does not entail any
mental state for its internal argument. More specifically, (64) is not a contradiction,
since the negated conjunct can be interpreted as ‘His threats didn’t reach Ruth’, where
rut is interpreted as the recipient (Goal) of the threats.
The following examples support further the distinction between the [-c] (Goal)
and [-c+m] (Experiencer) theta-roles. The Recipient interpretation of the [-c]
argument is made explicit using the sequence receive + nominalization of the relevant
[-c] verb. This is illustrated in (65b) for iyem (‘threatened’) and in (66) for another
[-c] verb tamax (‘supported’): 42
(65) a. dan iyem al rut
Dan threatened on Ruth
b. rut kibla iyumim mi-dan
Ruth received threats from-Dan
(66) a. dan tamax be- rut
Dan supported in-Ruth
42 There are, of course, additional [-c] verbs which have similar paraphrases: alav be- (insulted
in’)/safga elbonot me- (‘got insults from’), azar le- (‘helped to’)/kibla ezra me- (‘received help from’).