Unaccusativity and theticity
-
Patricia Irwin
Abstract
This chapter examines theticity in intransitive sentences. Starting with the assumption that the function of a thetic sentence is to introduce a referent into a discourse (without predicating anything of it), two requirements are proposed to characterize thetic intransitives: (A) the sole argument of the sentence must be vP-internal; and (B) the sole argument must be interpreted as a property. Both requirements have precedents in previous work: (A) incorporates Guéron’s (1980) observations on what she called the Presentation LF; and (B) builds on McNally’s (1998a) work on the semantics and discourse function of existential sentences. These requirements show that theticity cannot be explained by lexical verb or verb class; what matters for theticity is syntactic structure and semantic interpretation. It is then shown that the thetic/categorical distinction cuts across a commonly-accepted distinction in intransitive sentences, the unergative-unaccusative distinction. Specifically, only a subtype of unaccusative sentence, those with the “existential unaccusative” structure (Irwin 2018a), satisfies (A) and (B). By contrast, change-of-state unaccusatives pattern with unergative sentences in not being thetic.
Abstract
This chapter examines theticity in intransitive sentences. Starting with the assumption that the function of a thetic sentence is to introduce a referent into a discourse (without predicating anything of it), two requirements are proposed to characterize thetic intransitives: (A) the sole argument of the sentence must be vP-internal; and (B) the sole argument must be interpreted as a property. Both requirements have precedents in previous work: (A) incorporates Guéron’s (1980) observations on what she called the Presentation LF; and (B) builds on McNally’s (1998a) work on the semantics and discourse function of existential sentences. These requirements show that theticity cannot be explained by lexical verb or verb class; what matters for theticity is syntactic structure and semantic interpretation. It is then shown that the thetic/categorical distinction cuts across a commonly-accepted distinction in intransitive sentences, the unergative-unaccusative distinction. Specifically, only a subtype of unaccusative sentence, those with the “existential unaccusative” structure (Irwin 2018a), satisfies (A) and (B). By contrast, change-of-state unaccusatives pattern with unergative sentences in not being thetic.
Kapitel in diesem Buch
- Prelim pages i
- Table of contents v
- Preface vii
- Introduction 1
-
Part 1. Logic and philosophical background
- Categorical versus thetic sentences in the Universal Grammar of Realism 13
-
Part 2. Impersonal constructions
- Are theticity and sentence-focus encoded grammatical categories of Dutch? 33
- Presentational and related constructions in Norwegian with reference to German 69
- Copulas and information structure in Tanti Dargwa 105
-
Part 3. From logic content to linguistic form
- Infinitive constructions and theticity in German 143
- Strong and weak nominal reference in thetic and categorical sentences 155
- Adjectives and mode of expression 179
- Unaccusativity and theticity 199
-
Part 4. The logic-linguistics across languages
- From philosophical logic to linguistics 225
- Pseudocategorical or purely thetic? 283
- The thetic/categorical distinction as difference in common ground update 311
-
Part 5. Lexical links to attitudinality
- B-grade subjects and theticity 337
- Perception description, report and thetic statements 351
- Index 387
Kapitel in diesem Buch
- Prelim pages i
- Table of contents v
- Preface vii
- Introduction 1
-
Part 1. Logic and philosophical background
- Categorical versus thetic sentences in the Universal Grammar of Realism 13
-
Part 2. Impersonal constructions
- Are theticity and sentence-focus encoded grammatical categories of Dutch? 33
- Presentational and related constructions in Norwegian with reference to German 69
- Copulas and information structure in Tanti Dargwa 105
-
Part 3. From logic content to linguistic form
- Infinitive constructions and theticity in German 143
- Strong and weak nominal reference in thetic and categorical sentences 155
- Adjectives and mode of expression 179
- Unaccusativity and theticity 199
-
Part 4. The logic-linguistics across languages
- From philosophical logic to linguistics 225
- Pseudocategorical or purely thetic? 283
- The thetic/categorical distinction as difference in common ground update 311
-
Part 5. Lexical links to attitudinality
- B-grade subjects and theticity 337
- Perception description, report and thetic statements 351
- Index 387
