Abstract
I have three intersecting goals in this chapter. One is to give an overview of some of the main ideas of the book, the second is to pull together several threads that run throughout it, and the third is to point to areas for future research. I present these in the context of four broad areas. The first is category type (lexical vs. functional), the second is the nature of theta-roles, the third is the nature of lexical entries, and the fourth is the nature of coercion. Each area is important to my main proposals and each one leads to future questions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Others, such as Grohmann (2003), divide the basic sentential structure into three parts: the thematic layer (VP), the agreement layer (TP), and the discourse layer (CP).
- 2.
To be fair to McCloskey, he was only discussing the status of the subject as the argument that asymmetrically c-commands all the other arguments, and this follows from the subject’s position within the inflectional domain (and the position of the other arguments within the lexical layer). One can imagine applying the same logic to the direct object. If there is an internal inflectional layer that contains the direct object, we would expect the direct object to asymmetrically c-command all those arguments that remain within the inner VP. This is the position taken in this book.
- 3.
Recall, however, that I proposed in Chapter 7 that telic asp in languages such as Malagasy and Tagalog can introduce a Cause argument.
- 4.
In Inherent Complement Verb constructions, the nonreferential object may, in fact, take the place of V2. This would be similar to Hale and Keyser’s observations concerning unergative verbs like laugh. I depart from Hale and Keyser, however, in dealing with the complexity of elements such as shelve. Again I assume that shelve is in the place of a V2, which explains why it can take a PP complement, as in shelve the books on the windowsill.
- 5.
There are antecedents to this constraint on idioms that O’Grady mentions (e.g., Baltin 1989; Jackendoff 1983; Nunberg et al. 1994; Ross 1972).
- 6.
See Smith (1991) for a discussion of preparatory stages.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Travis, L.d. (2010). Conclusion. In: Inner Aspect. Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, vol 80. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-8550-4_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-8550-4_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-8549-8
Online ISBN: 978-90-481-8550-4
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)