Applicative Constructions in English and Japanese
2
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This article investigates an applicative system that is available in English and Japanese. Bantu languages contain applicative phrases that correlate arguments and events; these have been termed high applicative (APPLPHIGH) by Pylkkänen (2008). Contra general assumption, I claim that APPLPHIGH is also employed in English and Japanese. More specifically, I propose that thematic domains are recursive in these languages. If the syntactically highest phrase is VoiceP in a thematic domain, another thematic domain generates above VoiceP ([TP [VoiceP ...[VoiceP]]]). APPLPHIGH can project in the higher thematic domain, when an indirect passive is derived in Japanese and a have construction in English. What is unique regarding the proposal is that arguments are merged to [Spec, APPLPHIGH] by either External or Internal Merge. Considering the Duality of Semantics (Chomsky 2021), it is necessary to clarify that the interpretation that is assigned in [Spec, APPLPHIGH] is related to both External and Internal merge. I resolve this issue by discussing the interpretation, namely affectedness. Importantly, the current framework can naturally capture two idiosyncratic properties of have constructions. One is that this construction can be interpreted with either causative or experiencer reading. The other is that this construction cannot cooccur with unaccusative verbs.
Abstract
This article investigates an applicative system that is available in English and Japanese. Bantu languages contain applicative phrases that correlate arguments and events; these have been termed high applicative (APPLPHIGH) by Pylkkänen (2008). Contra general assumption, I claim that APPLPHIGH is also employed in English and Japanese. More specifically, I propose that thematic domains are recursive in these languages. If the syntactically highest phrase is VoiceP in a thematic domain, another thematic domain generates above VoiceP ([TP [VoiceP ...[VoiceP]]]). APPLPHIGH can project in the higher thematic domain, when an indirect passive is derived in Japanese and a have construction in English. What is unique regarding the proposal is that arguments are merged to [Spec, APPLPHIGH] by either External or Internal Merge. Considering the Duality of Semantics (Chomsky 2021), it is necessary to clarify that the interpretation that is assigned in [Spec, APPLPHIGH] is related to both External and Internal merge. I resolve this issue by discussing the interpretation, namely affectedness. Importantly, the current framework can naturally capture two idiosyncratic properties of have constructions. One is that this construction can be interpreted with either causative or experiencer reading. The other is that this construction cannot cooccur with unaccusative verbs.
참고문헌 (19)
- Alex, A, "Theoretical Aspects of Bantu Grammar", pp.17~45 (1993), Center for the Study of Language and Information
- Baker, M., "Theta Theory and the Syntax of Applicatives in Chichewa", Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 6, pp.353~389 (1988)
- Baker, M., "Thematic Structure: Its Role in Grammar", pp.23~46 (1992), Foris
- Beavers, J., "On Affectedness", Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 29, pp.335~370 (2011)
- Chomsky, N., "Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origin, and Use" (1986), Praeger
- Chomsky, N., "The Minimalist Program" (1995), MIT Press
- Chomsky, N., "Problems of Projection", Lingua, 130, pp.33~49 (2013)
- Chomsky, N., "Structures, Strategies and Beyond: Studies in Honour of Adriana Belletti", pp.3~16 (2015), John Benjamins
- Chomsky, N, "Where Are We Now, and Where Can We Hope to Go", pp.1~41 (2021), Gengo Kenkyu
- Kratzer, A., "Phrase Structure and the Lexicon", pp.109~137 (1996), Kluwer
- Larson, R., "On the Double Object Construction", Linguistic Inquiry, 19, pp.335~391 (1988)
- Manzini, M. R., "On Control and Control Theory", Linguistic Inquiry, 14, pp.421~446 (1983)
- Marantz, A., "On the Nature of Grammatical Relations" (1984), MIT Press
- Marantz, A., "Verbal Argument Structure : Events and Participants", Lingua, 130, pp.152~168 (2013)
- Pylkkänen, L., "Introducing Arguments" (2008), MIT Press
- Ritter, E., "Deriving Causation", Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, pp.519~555 (1993)
- Roeper, T., "Implicit Arguments and the Head-Complement Relation", Linguistic Inquiry, 18, pp.267~310 (1987)
- Takami, K., "A Semantic Constraint on the Benefactive Double Object Construction", English Linguistics, 20(1), pp.197~224 (2003)
- Washio, R., "The Japanese Passive", The Linguistic Review, 6, pp.227~263 (1987)