Unlikely Lexical Entries

Rice, Sally

doi:10.3765/bls.v14i0.1797

Cited by 26 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…18 The examples in (34) are taken from Rice (1988, p.206) 19 According to Allerton (1975, p.214), these verbs are among those to which contextual object deletion (that is, . definite object deletion) typically applies -14 -contrastive emphasis has often been proposed as one of the conditions on object deletion; see, for example, Rice 1988 andFellbaum andKegl 1989 Press, September 18, 1994 It is evident that these examples are associated with contrastive emphasis. In addition, it must be noted that the underlined verbs are all non-causative verbs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Remarks on causative verbs and object deletion in English

Onozuka

2007

Language Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rappaport Hovav and Levin 1998 contend that result verbs disallow object deletion because () of their lexical semantic properties. Their point is that the distinction between result verbs and manner verbs with their different event structure representation constitutes the important factor which dictates the possibility of the variation of argument realization, of which object deletion represents one instance. Responding to their claim, Goldberg 2001 presents the evidence () () which mainly concerns the object deletion of causative verbs which correspond to result verbs in English in order to show that the distinction is not substantial. The purpose of this paper is twofold. One is to present several pieces of evidence for Goldberg's contention based on the behavior of causative verbs with respect to object deletion. It is made evident that causative verbs in fact behave even freer than Goldberg's principle predicts. The other purpose is to examine some aspects of Goldberg's principle and demonstrate that it has wider applicability than originally intended, which eventually indicates that the principle comprises a part of a general set of conditions on the object deletion in English. The conclusion is that object deletion is not so much sensitive to the distinction between causative verbs and non-causative verbs as Rappaport Hovav and Levin claim it to be and therefore, object deletion fails to be a good diagnostic tool for the differentiation of the two verb classes. In other words, causativity is not a good parameter for the possibility of object deletion.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Remarks on causative verbs and object deletion in English

Onozuka

2007

Language Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although the possibility of reaching some generalization and motivation for null-complement verbs has also been explored (Fillmore 1986;Rice 1988), I will not pursue this any further for Greek, since the nullcomplementation construction is not the issue in the present article. Suffice it to say that the null-complementation construction is the licensing context (a necessary, as noted before, but not su‰cient condition) for a pragmatically driven interpretation.…”

Section: Syntactic Priority and Pragmatically Driven Interpretationsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Conceptual blending and the interpretation of relatives: A case study from Greek

Nikiforidou¹

2005

Cogl

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines instances of the pu relative construction in ModernGreek in which the semantic role of the head is underspecified by the syntax. Such cases include sentences whose nominal head corresponds to some complement of the relative clause predicate and sentences in which the head does not have any sort of syntactic relationship with the relative. The latter, which are characteristic of oral, informal discourse, have been completely ignored in the previous literature, which has defined relatives on the basis of exclusively structural criteria. It is argued that a unified account of the pu-construction (including gapped and gapless relatives) can be achieved if we analyze it as a conventional instruction for a particular kind of conceptual integration. Semantic and pragmatic factors influencing successful construal (one which leads to the construction of a unique blend) are systematically examined. The lack of a clear cut-o¤ point in acceptability for such utterances tallies with the conclusion reached here, namely that the constraints governing such uses are constraints on interpretability.

show abstract

“…It has been pointed out in the literature (cf. Rice (1988), Goldberg (2001), and references therein) that unspecified object deletion tends to occur in imperatives and conjuncts, which tends to focus on the action itself, rather than the result state. 6 The relevant examples are shown in (37)- (38) Thus, in this paper, when 'verb + away' appears in the context containing the conjunct or in the imperative form, I regarded it as an instance of the unspecified object deletion, rather than the continuative or iterative aspectual away.…”

Section: Corpus Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Grammaticalization of the Particle away in English: A Cartographic Approach

Niinuma

2014

IIS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigates the historical development of the particle away in English. Assuming the three-layered VP structure proposed by Ramchand (2008), and the Inner Aspect proposed by Travis (1994Travis ( , 2010, Fujita and Matsumoto (2005), and Ogawa and Niinuma (2013), I argue that there are three positions available for the particle away: the directional away is located in Res, which is the lowest in the VP structure, the completive aspectual away is in Asp(completive), which is above Proc, and the continuative or iterative aspectual away is in Asp(continuative or iterative), which is above Asp(completive). The data from Corpus of Historical American English show that the continuative or iterative aspectual away has been concatenated with the activity verbs earlier than accomplishment verbs, which is compatible with the syntactic analysis of grammaticalization proposed by Roberts and Roussou (2003).

show abstract

Unlikely Lexical Entries

Abstract: Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (1988), pp. 202-212

Cited by 26 publications

References 0 publications

Remarks on causative verbs and object deletion in English

Remarks on causative verbs and object deletion in English

Conceptual blending and the interpretation of relatives: A case study from Greek

Grammaticalization of the Particle away in English: A Cartographic Approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About