Advertisement

Severing the External Argument from its Verb

  • Angelika Kratzer
Part of the Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory book series (SNLT, volume 33)

Abstract

In his analysis of action sentences, Donald Davidson drew a clear distinction between arguments and adjuncts. Neglecting temporal relations, sentences like
  1. (1)

    We bought your slippers in Marrakesh.

     

Keywords

Argument Structure Linguistic Inquiry Internal Argument External Argument Thematic Role 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abney, Steven: 1987, The English Noun Phrase in its Sentential Aspect, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
  2. Bach, Emmon: 1977, Five Chapters on Natural Language Metaphysics, unpublished, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
  3. Baker, Mark: 1985, ‘Syntactic affixation and English gerunds’, in Jeffrey Goldberg, Susannah MacKaye and Michael T. Wescoat (eds.), West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics 4, Stanford Linguistics Association, pp. 1–11.Google Scholar
  4. Baker, Mark: 1988, Incorporation: A Theory of Grammatical Function Changing, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  5. Baker, Mark, Kyle Johnson and Ian Roberts: 1989, ‘Passive Arguments Raised’, Linguistic Inquiry 20, 219–252.Google Scholar
  6. Bierwisch, Manfred: 1983, ‘Semantische und Konzeptuelle Repräsentation Lexikalischer Einheiten’, in R. Ruzicka and W. Motsch (eds.), Studia Grammatika 22, 61–99.Google Scholar
  7. Bierwisch, Manfred: 1989, ‘Event Nominalizations. Proposals and Problems’, Linguistische Studien, Reihe A 194, Akademie Verlag, pp. 1–73.Google Scholar
  8. Belletti, Adriana and Luigi Rizzi: 1988, Psych-verbs and Θ-theory’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6, 291–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bittner, Maria: 1994, ‘Crosslinguistic Semantics’, Linguistics and Philosophy 17, 53–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Borer, Hagit: 1984, ‘The Projection Principle and Rules of Morphology’, in Charles Jones and Peter Sells (eds.), The Proceedings of NELS 14, GLSA, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, pp. 16–33.Google Scholar
  11. Borer, Hagit: 1990a, ‘Derived Nominals and the Causative-Inchoative Alternation: Two Case Studies in Parallel Morphology’, unpublished, University of California, Irvine.Google Scholar
  12. Borer, Hagit: 1990b, ‘V+ing: It Walks like an Adjective, It Talks like an Adjective’, Linguistic Inquiry 21, 95–103.Google Scholar
  13. Borer, Hagit: 1991, ‘The Causative-Inchoative Alternation: A Case Study in Parallel Morphology’, The Linguistic Review 8, 119–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bowers, John: 1990, ‘A Structural Theory of Predication’, unpublished, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
  15. Bowers, John: 1991, ‘The Syntax and Semantics of Nominals’, in Steven Moore and Adam Zachary Wyner (eds.), Proceedings from SALT 1. Cornell University Working Papers in Linguistics 10, 1–30.Google Scholar
  16. Bowers, John: 1993, ‘The Syntax of Predication’, Linguistic Inquiry 24, 591–656.Google Scholar
  17. Bresnan, Joan: 1982, ‘The Passive in Lexical Theory’, in Joan Bresnan (ed.), The Mental Representation of Grammatical Relations, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  18. Brugmann, Karl and Albert Thumb: 1913, Griechische Grammatik. Lautlehre, Stammbildungs und Flexionslehre, Syntax, Handbuch der klassischen Altertums-Wissenschaft, 4th C. H. Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, Munich.Google Scholar
  19. Castañeda, Hector-Neri: 1967, ‘Comments on Donald Davidson’s ‘The Logical Form of Action Sentences’, in Nicholas Rescher (ed.), The Logic of Decision and Action, University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, pp. 104–112.Google Scholar
  20. Chomsky, Noam: 1981, Lectures on Government and Binding, Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  21. Chomsky, Noam: 1991, ‘Some Notes on Economy of Derivation and Representation’, in Robert Freidin (ed.), Principles and Parameters in Comparative Grammar, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  22. Chomsky, Noam: 1992, ‘A Minimalist Program for Linguistic Theory’, MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics 1.Google Scholar
  23. Collins, Christopher Thad: 1993, Topics in Ewe Syntax, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
  24. Cresswell, Max J.: 1973, Logics and Languages, Methuen, London.Google Scholar
  25. Davidson, Donald: 1967, ‘The Logical Form of Action Sentences’, in Nicholas Rescher (ed.), The Logic of Decision and Action, University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, pp. 81–95.Google Scholar
  26. Dowty, David: 1989, ‘On the Semantic Content of the Notion of ‘Thematic Role’’, in Gennaro Chierchia, Barbara H. Partee and Raymond Turner (eds.), Properties, Types and Meaning. Volume II: Semantic Issues, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  27. Dowty, David: 1991, ‘Thematic Proto-Roles and Argument Selection’, Language 67, 547–619.Google Scholar
  28. Fanselow, Gisbert: 1991, Minimale Syntax, Volume 32, Groninger Arbeiten zur germanistischen Linguistik. Germanistisch Instituut, Reijksuniversiteit Groningen, Groningen.Google Scholar
  29. Fillmore, Charles J.: 1968, ‘The Case for Case’, in Emmon Bach and Robert Harms (eds.), Universals in Linguistic Theory, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, pp. 1–88.Google Scholar
  30. Grimshaw, Jane: 1990, Argument Structure, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.: 1991, ‘Extended Projection’, unpublished, Brandeis University.Google Scholar
  31. Grimshaw, Jane and Armin Mester: 1988, ‘Light Verbs and Q-Marking’, Linguistic Inquiry 19, 205–232.Google Scholar
  32. Grimshaw, Jane and Elisabeth Selkirk: 1976, ‘Infinitival Noun Phrases in Italian’, unpublished, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
  33. Gruber, Jeffrey S.: 1965, Studies in Lexical Relations, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
  34. Hale, Kenneth and Samuel J. Keyser: 1987, ‘A View form the Middle’, Lexicon Project Working Papers, 7, Center for Cognitive Science, MIT.Google Scholar
  35. Hale, Kenneth and Samuel J. Keyser: 1992, ‘On Argument Structure and the Lexical Expression of Syntactic Relations’, unpublished, MIT.Google Scholar
  36. Hazout, Ilan: 1990, Verbal Nouns: Theta-Theoretic Studies in Hebrew and Arabic, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
  37. Heim, Irene and Angelika Kratzer: forthcoming, Semantics in Generative Grammar, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  38. Higginbotham, James: 1985, ‘On Semantics’, Linguistic Inquiry 16, 547–593.Google Scholar
  39. Höhle, Tilman N.: 1976, ‘Die Aktiv-Passiv Relation im Deutschen. Grundlagen einer lexikalistischen Syntaxtheorie’, unpublished, Universität Köln.Google Scholar
  40. Höhle, Tilman N.: 1982, ‘Über Komposition und Derivation’, Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 1, 76–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Hung, Henrietta J.: 1988, ‘The Structure of Derived Nouns and Verbs in Malagasy: A Syntactic Account’, unpublished, McGill University.Google Scholar
  42. Jackendoff, Ray: 1977, X’ Syntax: A Study of Phrase Structure, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  43. Hung, Henrietta J.: 1983, Semantics and Cognition, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  44. Hung, Henrietta J.: 1990, Semantic Structures, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  45. Jaeggli, Osvaldo: 1986, ‘Passive’, Linguistic Inquiry 17, 587–622.Google Scholar
  46. Jaeggli, Osvaldo and Nina Hyams: 1989, ‘On the Independence and Interdependence of Syntactic and Morphological Properties: English Aspectual Come and Go’, unpublished, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  47. Jespersen, Otto: 1927, A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles, Part III (Syntax), Ejnar Munksggard, Copenhagen.Google Scholar
  48. Jespersen, Otto: 1940, A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles, Part V (Syntax), Ejnar Munksggard, Copenhagen.Google Scholar
  49. Johnson, Kyle: 1991, ‘Object Positions’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 9, 577–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Joseph, Brian and Jane C. Smirniotopoulos: 1993, ‘The Morphosyntax of the Modern Greek Verb as Morphology and not Syntax’, Linguistic Inquiry 19, 388–398.Google Scholar
  51. Klein, Ewan and Ivan Sag: 1985, ‘Type Driven Translation’, Linguistics and Philosophy 8, 163–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Kratzer, Angelika: forthcoming, The Event Argument and the Semantics of Voice, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  53. Larson, Richard K.: 1988, ‘On the Double Object Construction’, Linguistic Inquiry 19, 335–391.Google Scholar
  54. Lebeaux, David: 1984, ‘Nominalizations, Argument Structure, and the Organization of the Grammar’, unpublished, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
  55. Lebeaux, David: 1986, ‘The Interpretation of Derived Nominals’, in A. M. Farley, P. T. Farley and K. E. McCullogh (eds.), CLS 22: Papers from the General Session at the Twenty-Second Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society, University of Chicago, Chicago, pp. 231–247.Google Scholar
  56. Lewis, David: 1972, ‘General Semantics’, in Donald Davidson and Gilbert Harman (eds.), Semantics of Natural Language, D. Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 169–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Marantz, Alec: 1984, On the Nature of Grammatical Relations, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  58. May, Robert: 1977, The Grammar of Quantification, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
  59. May, Robert: 1985, Logical Form. Its Structure and Derivation, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  60. Mitchell, Erika: 1991, ‘Case and the Finnish Object’, in Almeida J. Toribio and Wayne E. Harbert (eds.), Cornell University Working Papers in Linguistics 9, 193–228.Google Scholar
  61. Montague, Richard: 1974, Formal Philosophy, Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.Google Scholar
  62. Parsons, Terence: 1980, ‘Modifiers and Quantifiers in Natural Language’, Canadian Journal of Philosophy, Suppl. Vol. 6, 29–60.Google Scholar
  63. Parsons, Terence: 1985, ‘Underlying Events in the Logical Analysis of English’, in Ernest LePore and Brian McLaughlin (eds.), Actions and Events: Perspectives on the Philosophy of Donald Davidson, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  64. Parsons, Terence: 1990, Events in the Semantics of Engl ish. A Study in Subatomic Semantics, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  65. Parsons, Terence: 1993, ‘Thematic Relations and Arguments’, unpublished, University of California, Irvine.Google Scholar
  66. Pesetsky, David: 1989, ‘Language-Particular Processes and the Earliness Principle’, unpublished, MIT.Google Scholar
  67. Pesetsky, David: 1995, Zero Syntax, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  68. Portner, Paul: 1992, Situation Theory and the Semantics of Propositional Expressions, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
  69. Rappaport, Malka and Beth Levin: 1986, ‘What to Do with Theta-Roles’, Lexicon Project Working Papers 11, Center for Cognitive Science, MIT.Google Scholar
  70. Rivero, Maria-Luisa: 1990, ‘The Location of Non-Active Voice in Albanian and Modern Greek’, Linguistic Inquiry 21, 135–146.Google Scholar
  71. Rivero, Maria-Luisa: 1992, ‘Adverb Incorporation and the Syntax of Adverbs in Modern Greek’, Linguistics and Philosophy 15, 289–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Roberts, Ian G.: The Representation of Implicit and Dethematized Subjects, Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  73. Roeper, Thomas and Muffy E. Siegel: 1978, ‘A Lexical Transformation for Verbal Compounds’, Linguistic Inquiry 9, 199–260.Google Scholar
  74. Schönfinkel, Moses: 1924, ‘Über die Bausteine der mathematischen Logik’, Mathematische Annalen 92, 305–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Smith, Carlota S.: 1991, The Parameter of Aspect, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Speas, Margaret J.: 1990, Phrase Structure in Natural Language, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Stechow, Arnim von: 1991, ‘Syntax und Semantik’, in Arnim von Stechow and Dieter Wunderlich (eds.), Semantik/Semantics. Ein internationales Handbuch der zeitgenössischen Forschung/An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, de Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 90–148.Google Scholar
  78. Williams, Edwin: 1980, ‘Predication’, Linguistic Inquiry 11, 203–238.Google Scholar
  79. Williams, Edwin: 1981a, ‘Argument Structure and Morphology’, The Linguistic Review 1, 81–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Williams, Edwin: 1981b, ‘On the Notions ‘Lexically Related’ and ‘Head of a Word’’, Linguistic Inquiry 12, 245–274.Google Scholar
  81. Zubizarreta, Maria Luisa: 1985, ‘The Relation between Morphophonology and Morphosyntax: The Case of Romance Causatives’, Linguistic Inquiry 16, 247–289.Google Scholar
  82. Zubizarreta, Maria Luisa: 1987, Levels of Representation in the Lexicon and in the Syntax, Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  83. Zucchi, Alessandro: 1988, The Language of Propositions and Events. Issues in the Syntax and Semantics of Nominalization, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Angelika Kratzer

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations