Skip to main content
Log in

Arguments for pseudo-resultative predicates

  • Published:
Natural Language & Linguistic Theory Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper addresses the compositionality puzzle presented by a class of ‘pseudo-resultative’ predicates, such as tight in the sentence She braided her hair tight. The analysis proposed reveals that the modification involved also provides insight into the nature of the lexical roots of verbs and their role in compositional semantics. Pseudo-resultative predicates superficially resemble resultative secondary predicates and resultative adverbs. However, it is shown that they do not modify any ‘word’ in the syntax. Rather, these predicates modify the root of the verb in a configuration which is licensed by the semantic type of the root and the structure of root creation verbs. The modification of such roots provides evidence that they are syntactically active, as proposed in the framework of Distributed Morphology (Halle and Marantz 1993; Marantz 1997; Arad 2003). It is shown that the roots are syntactically well-behaved and can be modified just like other ‘larger’ constituents. Syntactic parallels between the root creation verbs which license pseudo-resultative predicates and other structures further provide evidence for a syntactic decomposition of these verbs whereby the object is related to the root in a prepositional structure in a manner reminiscent of proposals for other classes of verbs in Hale and Keyser (1993, 2002).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ameka, Felix K. 1995. The linguistic construction of space in Ewe. Cognitive Linguistics 6: 139–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arad, Maya. 2003. Locality constraints on the interpretation of roots: the case of Hebrew denominal verbs. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 21: 737–778.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bittner, Maria. 1999. Concealed causatives. Natural Language Semantics 7: 1–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carrier, Jill, and Janet H. Randall. 1992. The argument structure and syntactic structure of resultatives. Linguistic Inquiry 23: 173–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, Noam. 2000. Minimalist inquiries: the framework. In Step by step: essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, eds. Martin Roger, David Michaels, and Juan Uriagereka, 89–156. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Beyond explanatory adequacy. In MIT occasional papers in linguistics, Vol. 20. Cambridge: MIT, Working Papers in Linguistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, Eve V., and Herbert H. Clark. 1979. When nouns surface as verbs. Language 55: 767–811.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, Donald. 1967. The logical form of action sentences. In The logic of decision and action, ed. Nicholas Rescher. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dowty, David. 1979. Word meaning and Montague Grammar: the semantics of verbs and times in generative semantics. Dordrecht: Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fong, Vivienne. 2001. ‘Into doing something’: where is the path in event predicates? Paper presented at the ESSLLI 2000 workshop on paths and telicity in event structure, University of Birmingham, 7–11 August, 2000.

  • Geuder, Wilhelm. 2000. Oriented adverbs: issues in the lexical semantics of event adverbs. Doctoral Dissertation, Universität Tübingen.

  • Grimshaw, Jane. 2005 [1993]. Semantic structure and semantic content in lexical representation. In Words and structure. Stanford: CSLI Publications.

  • Hale, Kenneth, and Samuel Jay Keyser. 1993. On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations. In The view from building 20: essays in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, eds. Kenneth Hale and Samuel Jay Keyser, 53–110. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hale, Kenneth, and Samuel Jay Keyser. 2002. Prolegomenon to a theory of argument structure. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halle, Morris, and Alec Marantz. 1993. Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection. In The view from building 20: essays in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, eds. Kenneth Hale and Samuel Jay Keyser, 111–176. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harley, Heidi. 2002. Possession and the double object construction. In Vol. 2 of Yearbook of linguistic variation, eds. Pierre Pica and Johan Rooryck. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harley, Heidi. 2005. How do verbs get their names? Denominal verbs, manner incorporation, and the ontology of verb roots in English. In The syntax of aspect, eds. Nomi Erteschik-Shir and Tova Rapoport. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoekstra, Teun. 1988. Small clause results. Lingua 74: 101–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horrocks, Geoffrey, and Melita Stavrou. 2003. Actions and their results in Greek and English: the complementarity of morphologically encoded (viewpoint) aspect and syntactic resultative predication. Journal of Semantics 20: 297–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackendoff, Ray. 1990. Semantic structures. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karlsson, Fred. 1999. Finnish: an essential grammar. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kayne, Richard S. 1985. Principles of particle constructions. In Grammatical representation, eds. Jacqueline Guéron, Hans-Georg Obenauer, and Jean-Yves Pollock, 101–140. Dordrecht: Foris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kester, Ellen-Petra. 1996. The nature of adjectival inflection. Doctoral Dissertation, Utrecht University.

  • Kiparsky, Paul. 1997. Remarks on denominal verbs. In Argument structure, eds. Alex Alsina, Joan Bresnan, and Peter Sells, Stanford: CSLI.

  • Kracht, Marcus. 2002. On the semantics of locatives. Linguistics & Philosophy 25: 157–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kratzer, Angelika. 1996. Severing the external argument from its verb. In Phrase structure and the lexicon, eds. Johan Rooryck and Laurie Zaring, 109–137. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kratzer, Angelika. 2005. Building resultatives. In Event arguments in syntax, semantics, and discourse, eds. Claudia Maienborn and Angelika Wöllenstein-Leisten, 177–212. Tübingen: Niemeyer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, Beth. 1993. English verb classes and alternations: a preliminary investigation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, Beth, and Malka Rappaport-Hovav. 1995. Unaccusativity: at the syntax-lexical semantics interface. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levinson, Lisa. 2007. The roots of verbs. Doctoral Dissertation, New York University.

  • Marantz, Alec. 1997. No escape from syntax: don’t try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon. In Proceedings of the 21st annual Penn linguistics colloquium, eds. Alexis Dimitriadis, Laura Siegel, Clarissa Surek-Clark, and Alexander Williams, 201–225. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Working Papers in Linguistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marantz, Alec. 2005. Objects out of the lexicon! Argument-structure in the syntax. Handout, University of Connecticut Linguistics Colloquium, April 2005.

  • Mateu, Jaume. 2000. Why can’t we wipe the slate clean? A lexical-syntactic approach to resultative constructions. Catalan Working Papers in Linguistics 8: 71–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Napoli, Donna J.. 1992. Secondary resultative predicates in Italian. Journal of Linguistics 28: 53–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunberg, Geoffrey. 1995. Transfers of meaning. Journal of Semantics 12: 109–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, Terence. 1990. Events in the semantics of English. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pesetsky, David. 1995. Zero syntax: experiencers and cascades. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinker, Stephen. 1989. Learnability and cognition: the acquisition of argument structure. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pylkkänen, Liina. 2002. Introducing arguments. Doctoral Dissertation, MIT.

  • Rappaport Hovav, Malka, and Beth Levin. 1998. Building verb meaning. In The projection of arguments: lexical and compositional factors, eds. Miriam Butt and Wilhelm Geuder, 97–134. Stanford: CSLI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, Louisa, and Douglas J. Arnold. 1994. Prenominal adjectives and the phrasal/lexical distinction. Journal of Linguistics 30: 187–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, Jane. 1983. Resultatives. In Papers in lexical-functional grammar, eds. Lori Levin, Malka Rappaport, and Annie Zaenen, 143–158. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.

    Google Scholar 

  • Talmy, Leonard. 1991. Paths to realization: a typology of event integration. In Vol. 91 of Buffalo working papers in linguistics, 147–187. Buffalo: SUNY Buffalo Linguistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tenny, Carol. 2000. Core events and adverbial modification. In Events as grammatical objects: the converging perspectives of lexical semantics and syntax, eds. Carol Tenny and James Pustejovsky. Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information.

    Google Scholar 

  • Washio, Ryuichi. 1997. Resultatives, compositionality and language variation. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 6: 1–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wechsler, Stephen. 2005. Resultatives under the event-argument homomorphism model of telicity. In The syntax of aspect, eds. Nomi Erteschik-Shir and Tova Rapoport. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler, Max W., Alan Yates, and Nicholas Dols. 1999. Catalan: a comprehensive grammar. London/New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Niina Ning. 2002. Movement within a spatial phrase. In Perspectives on prepositions, eds. Hubert Cuyckens and Günter Radden, 47–63. Tübingen: Niemeyer.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lisa Levinson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Levinson, L. Arguments for pseudo-resultative predicates. Nat Lang Linguist Theory 28, 135–182 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-010-9089-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-010-9089-x

Keywords

Navigation