Argument structure and quantifier scope
-
John Bowers
Abstract
In this article, I argue for a theory in which all argument DP/PPs (as well as ‘quasi-arguments’ such as Source, Goal, Benefactive, Instrumental, etc.) are projected above the root in specifiers of ‘light verb’ categories. I also argue that the order in which the three basic argument categories Ag(ent), Th(eme) and Appl(icative) are merged is exactly the opposite of that which is usually assumed, namely, Ag < Th < Appl. The proposed theory succeeds in deriving the subject of active sentences and the by-phrase of passives from the same argument position without assuming syntactic lowering or an ad hoc rule of “th-transfer”. It also accounts directly for the relation between double object and propositional dative structures in a way that explains their special syntactic properties. Finally, the proposed theory, together with some new ideas about quantifier scope, derives the special scope properties of these dative constructions.
Abstract
In this article, I argue for a theory in which all argument DP/PPs (as well as ‘quasi-arguments’ such as Source, Goal, Benefactive, Instrumental, etc.) are projected above the root in specifiers of ‘light verb’ categories. I also argue that the order in which the three basic argument categories Ag(ent), Th(eme) and Appl(icative) are merged is exactly the opposite of that which is usually assumed, namely, Ag < Th < Appl. The proposed theory succeeds in deriving the subject of active sentences and the by-phrase of passives from the same argument position without assuming syntactic lowering or an ad hoc rule of “th-transfer”. It also accounts directly for the relation between double object and propositional dative structures in a way that explains their special syntactic properties. Finally, the proposed theory, together with some new ideas about quantifier scope, derives the special scope properties of these dative constructions.
Chapters in this book
- Prelim pages i
- Table of contents v
- Argument structure and syntactic relations 1
-
Part 1. Semantic and syntactic properties of the event structure
- Aspectual composition in causatives 13
- Atelicity and anticausativization 35
- Minimalist variability in the verb phrase 69
- On the l-syntax of manner and causation 89
- Nominalization, event, aspect and argument structure 113
-
Part 2. A global view on argument structure
- The syntax of argument structure 133
- Argument structure and quantifier scope 151
-
Part 3. Syntactic heads involved in argument structure
- An l-syntax for adjuncts 183
- The derivation of dative alternations 203
- Basque ditransitives 233
- Applicative structure and Mandarin ditransitives 261
- Unintentionally out of control 283
-
Part 4. Argument structure in language acquisition
- Zero time-arguments in French child language 305
- Reevaluating the role of innate linking rules in the acquisition of verb argument structure 325
- Name and subject index 345
Chapters in this book
- Prelim pages i
- Table of contents v
- Argument structure and syntactic relations 1
-
Part 1. Semantic and syntactic properties of the event structure
- Aspectual composition in causatives 13
- Atelicity and anticausativization 35
- Minimalist variability in the verb phrase 69
- On the l-syntax of manner and causation 89
- Nominalization, event, aspect and argument structure 113
-
Part 2. A global view on argument structure
- The syntax of argument structure 133
- Argument structure and quantifier scope 151
-
Part 3. Syntactic heads involved in argument structure
- An l-syntax for adjuncts 183
- The derivation of dative alternations 203
- Basque ditransitives 233
- Applicative structure and Mandarin ditransitives 261
- Unintentionally out of control 283
-
Part 4. Argument structure in language acquisition
- Zero time-arguments in French child language 305
- Reevaluating the role of innate linking rules in the acquisition of verb argument structure 325
- Name and subject index 345
