Abstract
We investigate how saturation of different theta-roles by the non-head constituent correlates with derivational suffixes and, in turn, with the event structures compatible with those suffixes. We also investigate XP realisations of themes, causers and instruments in deverbal nominal and participial constructions and which ±agentive and/or ±process/episodic sub-readings allow which type of argument. It turns out that for each theta-role, the contexts that allow an XP realisation are exactly the complement of the contexts that would allow compounding of that same theta-role. We take this complementarity to be an indirect argument in favour of (i) divorcing argument licensing from argument selection and (ii) dissociating argument introduction from event-structure-related heads, which then potentially reaffirms the role of roots in (first phase) syntax.
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to the audience of Roots V (UCL/QMUL), especially Hagit Borer, Jason Merchant and Gillian Ramchand for their stimulating questions and remarks, and to the editors of the special issue. We are also indebted to Hilda Koopman and two anonymous reviewers for insightful suggestions and comments on the manuscript.
References
Alexiadou, A. 2001. Functional structure in nominals: Nominalization and ergativity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.42Search in Google Scholar
Alexiadou, A. 2009. On the role of syntactic locality in morphological processes: The case of (Greek) derived nominals. In A. Giannakidou & M. Rathert (eds.), Quantification, Definiteness and Nominalization, 253–280. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780199541089.003.0011Search in Google Scholar
Alexiadou, A. 2017. On the complex relationship between deverbal compounds and argument supporting nominals. In M. Bloch-Trojnar & A. Malicka-Kleparska (eds.), Aspect and valency in nominals, 134, vol. 1. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter.10.1515/9781501505430-003Search in Google Scholar
Alexiadou, A., E. Anagnostopoulou & F. Schäfer. 2015. External arguments in transitivity alternations: A layering approach, vol. 55. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199571949.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Alexiadou, A. & F. Schäfer. 2010. On the syntax of episodic vs. dispositional-er nominals. In A. Alexiadou and M. Rathert (eds.), The syntax of nominalizations across languages and frameworks, 9–38.10.1515/9783110245875.9Search in Google Scholar
Alexopoulou, T., R. Folli & G. Tsoulas. 2013. Bare number. In R. Folli, C. Sevdali & R. Trusswell (eds.), Syntax and its limits. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199683239.003.0015Search in Google Scholar
Anagnostopoulou, E. 2003. Participles and voice. In A. Alexiadou, M. Rathert & A. von Stechow (eds.), Perfect explorations Interface Explorations, 1–36. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110902358.1Search in Google Scholar
Anagnostopoulou, E. & Y. Samioti. 2013. Allosemy, idioms, and their domains: Evidence from adjectival participles. In R. Folli, C. Sevdali & R. Truswell (eds.), Syntax and its Limits, 218–250. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199683239.003.0012Search in Google Scholar
Anastasiadis-Symeonidis, A. 2002. Reverse dictionary of modern greek. Thessaloniki: Institouto Neoellinikon Spoudon.Search in Google Scholar
Angelopoulos, N. (2012). The Morphosyntax of Deverbal Compounds in Greek. MPhil Thesis, Cambridge.Search in Google Scholar
Barker, C. 2011. Possessives and relational nouns. In K. von Heusinger, C. Maienborn, and P. Portner (eds.), Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning. HSK 33.2, 1108–1129. Berlin: De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Baker, M. C. & N. Vinokurova. 2009. On agent nominalizations and why they are not like event nominalizations. Language 85(3). 517–556.10.1353/lan.0.0144Search in Google Scholar
Borer, H. 2005. The normal course of events, vol. 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press on Demand.Search in Google Scholar
Borer, H. 2012. In the event of a nominal. In M. Everaert et al. (eds.), The theta system: Argument structure at the interface, 52–77. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199602513.003.0005Search in Google Scholar
Borer, H. 2013. Structuring sense: Volume III: Taking form, vol. 3. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199263936.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Borer, H. 2014. Wherefore roots? Theoretical Linguistics 40(3–4). 343–359.10.1515/tl-2014-0016Search in Google Scholar
Bruening, B. 2013. By phrases in passives and nominals. Syntax 16(1). 1–41.10.1111/j.1467-9612.2012.00171.xSearch in Google Scholar
Collins, C. 2005. A smuggling approach to raising in English. Linguistic Inquiry 36(2). 289–298.10.1162/0024389053710701Search in Google Scholar
Grimshaw, J. 1990. Argument structure. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Harley, H. (2005). One-replacement, unaccusativity, acategorial roots, and bare phrase structure. Harvard Working Papers in Linguistics, 11, 59–78.Search in Google Scholar
Harley, H. 2009. Compounding in DM. In Rochelle Lieber and Pavol Stekauer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of compounding. Oxford: OUP.Search in Google Scholar
Iordăchioaia, G., A. Alexiadou & A. Pairamidis. 2017. Morphosyntactic sources for nominal synthetic compounds in English and Greek. Zeitschrift Für Wortbildung/Journal of Word Formation 1(1). 47–72.10.3726/b11246_47Search in Google Scholar
Kamp, H. & A. Roßdeutscher. 1994. Remarks on lexical structure and DRS construction. Theoretical Linguistics 20(2–3). 97–164.10.1515/thli.1994.20.2-3.97Search in Google Scholar
Kayne, R. S. 2000. Parameters and universals. New York: Oxford University Press on Demand.10.1093/oso/9780195102352.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Kayne, R. S. 2005. Movement and silence, vol. 36. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195179163.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Koopman, H. 2017. A note on huave morpheme ordering: Local dislocation or generalized U20? In Gautam Sengupta, Shruti Sircar, Gayatri Raman & Rahul Balusu (eds.), Perspectives on the architecture and acquisition of syntax: Essays in honour of R. Amritavalli. Singapore: Springer.10.1007/978-981-10-4295-9_2Search in Google Scholar
Kratzer, A. (2001). Building statives. Proceedings of the Berkeley linguistics society, 26.10.3765/bls.v26i1.1131Search in Google Scholar
Marantz, A. 2013. Verbal argument structure: Events and participants. Lingua 130. 152–168.10.1016/j.lingua.2012.10.012Search in Google Scholar
Merchant, J. (2017). Roots don’t select, categorial heads do: L-selection of PPs may vary by category. Paper presented at Roots V, QMUL/ UCL, London, 17 June 2017.10.1515/tlr-2019-2020Search in Google Scholar
Michelioudakis, D. & N. Angelopoulos. 2013a. The syntactic status of n-incorporation in deverbal compounds. Studies in Greek Linguistics 33. 209–227.Search in Google Scholar
Michelioudakis, D. & N. Angelopoulos. (2013b). Correlating event and argument structure in synthetic compounds. Paper presented at ISTAL, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, April 2013.Search in Google Scholar
Ntelitheos, D. (2012). A syntactic analysis of synthetic and phrasal compound formation in Greek. Issues in Mediterranean Syntax.Search in Google Scholar
Panagiotidis, P., A. Revithiadou & V. Spiropoulos. 2017. Little v as a categorizing verbal head: Evidence from Greek. In Roberta D’Alessandro, Irene Franco & Ángel Gallego (eds.), The verbal domain, 29–48. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198767886.003.0002Search in Google Scholar
Parsons, T. 1990. Events in the semantics of English. Vol. 5. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Ralli, A. 2013. Compounding and its locus of realization: Evidence from Greek and Turkish. Word Structure 6(2). 181–200.10.3366/word.2013.0044Search in Google Scholar
Roeper, T. & D. Siegel. 1978. A lexical transformation for verbal compounds. Linguistic Inquiry 9. 199–260.Search in Google Scholar
Williams, E. 1981. Argument structure and morphology. The Linguistic Review 1(1). 81–114.10.1515/tlir.1981.1.1.81Search in Google Scholar
Wood, J. & A. Marantz. (2015). The interpretation of external arguments. Ms. Yale and NYU.10.1093/oso/9780198767886.003.0011Search in Google Scholar
© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- editorial
- Introduction: Roots in context
- research-article
- Roots don’t select, categorial heads do: lexical-selection of PPs may vary by category
- How do you smile along a path?
- Roots, their structure and consequences for derivational timing
- Selecting roots: the view from compounding
- Roots into functional nodes: Exploring locality and semi-lexicality
- Inchoatives in causative clothing
- Compounds, composability, and morphological idiosyncrasy
- Constraining long-distance allomorphy
- (Non-)Intersective adjectives and root suppletion
- Agreeing in number: Verbal plural suppletion and reduplication
- Changing shape according to strength: Evidence from root allomorphy in Greek
- New reasons to root for the Semitic root from Mehri and Neo-Aramaic
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- editorial
- Introduction: Roots in context
- research-article
- Roots don’t select, categorial heads do: lexical-selection of PPs may vary by category
- How do you smile along a path?
- Roots, their structure and consequences for derivational timing
- Selecting roots: the view from compounding
- Roots into functional nodes: Exploring locality and semi-lexicality
- Inchoatives in causative clothing
- Compounds, composability, and morphological idiosyncrasy
- Constraining long-distance allomorphy
- (Non-)Intersective adjectives and root suppletion
- Agreeing in number: Verbal plural suppletion and reduplication
- Changing shape according to strength: Evidence from root allomorphy in Greek
- New reasons to root for the Semitic root from Mehri and Neo-Aramaic