Cover not available
Part of
Historical Linguistics 2015: Selected papers from the 22nd International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Naples, 27-31 July 2015
Edited by Michela Cennamo and Claudia Fabrizio
[Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 348] 2019
► pp. 445–458

Chapter 21
The locative alternation with spray/load verbs in Old English

This paper investigates the locative alternation with spray/load verbs in Old English and the meanings associated with their syntactic variants. The main question addressed is whether in Old English spray/load verbs had the same argument structure realizations as their descendants today. It is shown that not all verbs investigated licensed the locative alternation.
Keywords: locative alternation, spray/load verbs, change of state, change of location, lexicalist approach, Old English
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The locative alternation in present-day English
  • 3.Spray/load verbs in Old English
  • 4.Syntactic variants with spray/load verbs in Old English
    • 4.1Sow
    • 4.2Smear
    • 4.3Load
  • 5.The semantic functions of nominal expressions marked with Accusative, Dative and Instrumental in OE
  • 6.Concluding remarks
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 10 September 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.348.21sow
References (33)
References
Anderson, Stephen. R. 1971. On the role of deep structure in semantic interpretation. Foundations of Language 7. 387–396.Google Scholar
Allen, Cynthia L. 1995. Case marking and reanalysis. Grammatical relations from Old to Early Modern English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Beavers, John. 2010. The Structure of Lexical Meaning: Why Semantics Really Matters. Language 86. 821–864. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2017. The spray/load alternation. In Martin Everaert, Henk van Rimsdijk, Rob Goedemans & Bart Hellebrandse, (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Syntax, 466–478. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, [URL]. (7 August, 2018.) DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blake, Barry. 1994. Case. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Clark, Eve V. & Herbert H. Clark. 1979. When nouns surface as verbs. Language 55. 767–811. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dowty, David. 2000. The fallacy of argument alternation. In Ravin Yael & Claudia Laecock (eds.), Polysemy: Theoretical and computational approaches, 111–128. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Eythórsson, Thórhallur. 1995. Verbal syntax in the early Germanic languages. Ithaca: Cornell University doctoral dissertation.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles. J. 1968. The case for case. In Emmon Bach & Robert Harms (eds.), Universals in linguistic theory. 1–88. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga, Ans van Kemenade, Willem Koopman & Wim van der Wurff. 2000. The syntax of early English (Cambridge Syntax Guides 1). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fumiko, Yoshikawa. 2007. An etymological note on verbs which show locative alternation. Studies in the Humanities and Sciences XXXXVIII No. 2. 203–223.Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele. E. 1995. Constructions: a construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
van. Kemenade, Ans 1987. Syntactic case and morphological case in the history of English. Dordrecht: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Kemenade, Ans 1997. V2 and embedded topicalization in Old and Middle English. In Ans van Kemenade & Nigel Vincent (eds), Parameters of morphosyntactic change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 326–352.Google Scholar
van. Kemenade, Ans, and Bettelou Los. 2003. Particles and prefixes in Dutch and English. In Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of morphology. 79–118. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Levin, Beth. 1993. English verb classes and alternations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Levin, Beth & Malka Rappaport Hovav. 1998. Morphology and lexical semantics. In Andrew Spencer and Arnold Zwicky (eds.), The handbook of morphology, 248–271. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Levin, Beth. 2006. English alternations: a unified account. [URL]. (16 December, 2015.)
Levin, Beth & Malka Rappaport Hovav. 2005. Argument realization (Research Surveys in Linguistics Series). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McFadden, Thomas. 2013. Resultativity and the development of Germanic preverbal ge- from Old to Middle English. [URL]. (1 November – 16 December, 2015.)
Millward, C. M. & Mary Hayes. 2012. A biography of the English language. Boston: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Bruce.1985. Old English syntax. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Oxford English Dictionary (OED). 2013. Oxford: Oxford University Press, [URL]. (1 November – 16 December, 2015.)Google Scholar
Pinker, Steven. 1989. Learnability and cognition: The acquisition of argument structure. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rappaport, Malka and Beth Levin. 1988. What to do with θ-roles. In Wendy Wilkins (ed.). Syntax and Semantics 21. Thematic Relations. San Diego: Academic Press, 7–36.Google Scholar
Rappaport Hovav, Malka & Beth Levin. 1998. Building verb meanings. In Miriam Butt & Wilhelm Geuder (eds), The projection of arguments: Lexical and compositional factors. 97–134. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 2008. The English dative alternation: the case for verb sensitivity. Journal of Linguistics 44. 129–167.Google Scholar
Schwartz-Norman, Linda. 1976. The Grammar of Content and Container. Journal of Linguistics 12. 279–287. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elisabeth. C. 1972. The history of English syntax. A transformational approach to the history of English sentence structure. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Taylor, Ann, et al.. 2003. York-Toronto-Helsinki parsed corpus of Old English prose (YCOE). York: University of York.Google Scholar
Toller, Thomas N. & Alistair Campbell (eds.). [1838] 1972. An Anglo- Saxon dictionary, based on the manuscript collection of late Joseph Bosworth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Visser, Frederik Th. 1963/1973. An historical syntax of the English language. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Walkden, George. 2014. Syntactic reconstruction and Proto-Germanic. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wasow, Thomas. 1997. Remarks on grammatical weight. Language Variation and Change 9. 81–105. DOI logoGoogle Scholar