We argue that applicative heads always appear above the lexical VP, regardless of the semantics of the construction. Thematic Applicatives select a nominal expression and a VP as argument, parallel to Pylkkänen’s (2008) “high” applicatives. The applied argument is merged in Spec, ApplP and receives a role such as beneficiary. Raising Applicatives appear in the same position above the lexical VP, but do not select an underlying nominal argument. Instead, they attract a goal DP from within the ditransitive VP to their specifier. This pattern captures the properties of a theme-goal ditransitive construction (Pylkkänen’s “low” applicative). We show that the Mandarin double object construction ‘Verb gei IO DO’ instantiates a raising applicative, where gei realizes Appl0.
2024. Moving heads to specifiers: Evidence from Mandarin multiple pre-subject modals. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 42:1 ► pp. 247 ff.
Lin, Jo-wang
2024. 名物化與「的」字結構. Language and Linguistics. 語言暨語言學 25:3 ► pp. 454 ff.
Nie, Yining
2024. Applicative Recursion and Nominal Licensing. Linguistic Inquiry 55:4 ► pp. 725 ff.
Myler, Neil
2023. Argument Structure and Morphology in Cochabamba Quechua (with Occasional Comparison with Other Quechua Varieties). In Formal Approaches to Languages of South America, ► pp. 311 ff.
Bi, Luosha
2022. Applicatives Not Applicable: Evidence from Mandarin DOCs. BCP Social Sciences & Humanities 15 ► pp. 144 ff.
2014. Why particles are not particular: Sentence‐final particles in Chinese as heads of a split CP. Studia Linguistica 68:1 ► pp. 77 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 21 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.