Cover not available
Part of
Structuring the Argument: Multidisciplinary research on verb argument structure
Edited by Asaf Bachrach, Isabelle Roy and Linnaea Stockall
[Language Faculty and Beyond 10] 2014
► pp. 23–43

Can we dance without doing a dance?

Two opposite views on the integration of roots in the syntactic structure of the VP

| Centre de Lingüística Teòrica, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona
This paper presents two confronted theories of how roots – elements which, by definition, convey exclusively conceptual content – are integrated in the syntactic structure of the vP. In the first theory, defended by Marantz (2011), roots can only be adjuncts (modifiers), either of an abstract verbal head or of a DP merged as the object. In the second theory, defended by Acedo-Matellán (2010, 2011a), roots can occupy an adjunct position, but they can also be complements of an abstract verbal head or of an (abstract) preposition. Empirical and theoretical arguments are adduced to evaluate both proposals, which, however, share the same fundamental idea that (verbal) argument structure is a syntactic configuration.
Published online: 24 July 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lfab.10.02ace
References (54)
References
Acedo-Matellán, Víctor. 2006. “Una aproximació sintàctica als verbs prefixats en català”. Estudios Catalanes 4: 41–78.Google Scholar
. 2010. Argument Structure and the Syntax-Morphology Interface. A Case Study in Latin and other Languages . Barcelona: Universitat de Barcelona dissertation. [URL]Google Scholar
. 2011a. “A comment on Marantz’s “Syntactic approaches to argument structure without incorporation””.Presented at the “Structuring the Argument: A multidisciplinary workshop on the mental representation of verbal argument structure”. Structures Formelles du Langage – UMR 7023 Paris 8/CNRS, Paris, 5–7 september 2011.
. 2011b. “A layered-derivation approach to the conflation/incorporation distinction”. Presented at the “Workshop on verbal elasticity. Framing the verb/satellite distinction from a biolinguistic perspective”. Centre de Lingüística Teòrica, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, 3–5 october 2011.
. 2013. “Merging Roots in Bare Phrase Structure and the Conflation/Incorporation Distinction”. NELS 42(1): 1–14.Google Scholar
Acedo-Matellán, Víctor and Jaume Mateu. To appear. “From syntax to roots: a syntactic approach to root interpretation”. In The syntax of roots and the roots of syntax , Artemis Alexiadou, Hagit Borer and Florian Schäfer (Eds.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Alexiadou, Artemis, Hagit Borer and Florian Schäfer (Eds.). To appear. The syntax of roots and the roots of syntax . Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Booij, Geert. 2009. “Construction morphology and compounding”. In The Oxford Handbook of Compounding , Rochelle Lieber and Pavol Štekauer (Eds.), 201–216. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Borer, Hagit. 2005. Structuring Sense, vol. 2: The normal course of events . Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Centineo, Giulia. 1996. “A lexical theory of auxiliary selection in Italian”. Probus 8(3): 223–271. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1993. “A minimalist program for linguistic theory”. In The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger , Kenneth Hale and Samuel J. Keyser (Eds.), 1–52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Clark, Eve V. and Herbert H. Clark. 1979. “When nouns surface as verbs”. Language 55(4): 767–810. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Belder, Marijke. 2011. Roots and Affixes. Eliminating Lexical Categories from Syntax . Utrecht: Utrecht University/Uil-OTS and HUBrussel/CRISSP PhD thesis. [URL]Google Scholar
De Belder, Marijke and Jeroen van Craenenbroeck. 2011. “How to merge a root” (ms.). CRISSP/HUB/UiL-OTS/Utrecht and CRISSP/HUB/FUSL/KUL. [URL]
Di Sciullo, Anna-Maria. 1997. “Prefixed verbs and adjunct-identification”. In Projections and Interface Conditions. Essays on Modularity , Anna-Maria Di Sciullo (Ed.), 52–74. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Embick, David. 2010. Localism versus globalism in morphology and phonology . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Espinal, M. Teresa. 2010. “Bare nominals in Catalan and Spanish. Their structure and meaning”. Lingua 120(4): 984–1009. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Espinal, M. Teresa and Jaume Mateu. 2011. “Bare nominals and argument structure in Catalan and Spanish”. The Linguistic Review 28: 1– 39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Espinal, M. Teresa and Louise McNally. 2011. “Bare singular nominals and incorporating verbs in Spanish and Catalan”. Journal of Linguistics 47: 87–128. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hale, Kenneth and Samuel J. Keyser. 1993. “On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations”. In The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger , Kenneth Hale and Samuel J. Keyser (Eds.), 53–109. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 2002. Prolegomenon to a Theory of Argument Structure . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Halle, Morris and Alec Marantz. 1993. “Distributed Morphology and the pieces of inflection”. In The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger , Hale, Kenneth and Samuel J. Keyser (Eds.), 111–176. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Harley, Heidi. 2004. “Merge, conflation, and head movement: The First Sister Principle revisited”. NELS 34(1): 239–254.Google Scholar
. 2005. “How do verbs get their names? Denominal verbs, Manner incorporation and the ontology of verb roots in English”. In The Syntax of Aspect. Deriving Thematic and Aspectual Interpretation , Nomi Erteschik-Shir and Tova Rapoport (Eds.), 42–64. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
. 2009. “Compounding in Distributed Morphology”. In Oxford Handbook of Compounding , Rochelle Lieber and Pavol Stekauer (Eds.), 129–144. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
. To appear. “On the identity of roots”. Theoretical Linguistics . [URL]Google Scholar
Haugen, Jason D. 2009. “Hyponymous objects and Late Insertion”. Lingua 119(2): 242–262. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Horn, Laurence R. 1980. “Affixation and the Unaccusative Hypothesis”. CLS 16: 134–146.Google Scholar
Kayne, Richard. 2009. “Antisymmetry and the Lexicon”. Linguistic Variation Yearbook 8(1): 1–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levin, Beth and Tova R. Rapoport. 1988. “Lexical Subordination”. CLS 24: 275–289.Google Scholar
Lieber, Rochelle. 1983. “Argument Linking and Compounds in English”. Linguistic Inquiry 14: 251–285.Google Scholar
. 2009. “A Lexical Semantic Approach to Compounding”. In The Oxford Handbook of Compounding , Rochelle Lieber and Pavol Štekauer (Eds.), 78–104. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Marantz, Alec. 1995. “Cat as a phrasal idiom” (ms.). Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
. 1997. “No escape from syntax: Don’t try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon”. Penn Linguistics Colloquium (PLC) 21: 201–225.Google Scholar
. 2003. “Subjects and objects” (ms.). Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
. 2005. “Objects out of the lexicon: Objects as events” (ms.). Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
. 2011. “Syntactic approaches to argument structure without incorporation: Doing the (anti-lexicalist) dance without doing the dance”. Presented at the “Structuring the Argument: A multidisciplinary workshop on the mental representation of verbal argument structure”. Structures Formelles du Langage – UMR 7023 Paris 8/CNRS, Paris, 5–7 September 2011.
. 2013. “Locality domains for contextual allomorphy across the interfaces”. In Distributed Morphology Today . Morphemes for Morris Halle, Alec Marantz and Ora Matushansky (Eds.), 95–115. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mateu, Jaume. 2002. Argument Structure . Relational Construal at the Syntax-Semantics Interface . Bellaterra: Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona dissertation. [URL].Google Scholar
. 2008. “Argument structure and denominal verbs” (ms.). Bellaterra: Centre de Lingüística Teòrica-Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.Google Scholar
. 2012. “Conflation and incorporation processes in resultative constructions”. In Telicity, Change, and State: A Cross-Categorial View of Event Structure , Violeta Demonte and Louise McNally (Eds.), 252–278. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McIntyre, Andrew. 2004. “Event paths, conflation, argument structure, and VP shells”. Linguistics 42(3): 523–71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mendikoetxea, Amaya. 1999. “Construcciones inacusativas y pasivas”. In Gramática Descriptiva de la Lengua Española, vol. 2: Las Construccions Sintácticas Fundamentales. Relaciones Temporales, Aspectuales y Modales , Ignacio Bosque and Violeta Demonte (Eds.), 1575–1629. Madrid: Real Academia Española and Espasa Calpe.Google Scholar
Ramchand, Gillian C. 2008. Verb meaning and the lexicon. A first phase syntax . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rigau, Gemma. 1997. “Locative sentences and related constructions in Catalan: ésser/haver alternation”. In Theoretical Issues at the Morphology-Syntax Interface , Amaya Mendikoetxea and Myriam Uribe-Etxebarria (Eds.), 395–421. Bilbao and Donostia-San Sebastián: Universidad del País Vasco and Diputación Foral de Gipuzkoa.Google Scholar
Rimell, Laura. 2010. “Event structure and verb meaning possibilities for denominal verbs”. Presented at the “Workshop on the Lexicon-Syntax Interface: Verb Meaning, Event Semantics and Argument Structure”, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, 2–3 December 2010.Google Scholar
Savescu Ciucivara, Oana and Jim Wood. 2013. “Re-prefixation and Talmy’s parameter”. NELS 41(1): 193–204.Google Scholar
Sorace, Antonella. 2000. “Gradients in auxiliary selection with intransitive verbs”. Language 76(4): 859–890. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Snyder, William. 1995. Language Acquisition and Language Variation: The Role of Morphology . Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology PhD thesis.Google Scholar
Talmy, Leonard. 1991. “Path to realization: A typology of event conflation”. Berkeley Linguistic Society (BLS) 17: 480-519.Google Scholar
. 2000. Toward a Cognitive Semantics, vol. 2: Typology and Process in Concept Structuring . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Washio, Ryuichi. 1997. “Resultatives, compositionality and language variation”. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 6: 1–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wechsler, Stephen. 1989. “Accomplishments and the prefix re-”. NELS 19: 419–434.Google Scholar
Zubizarreta, María Luisa and Eunjeong Oh. 2007. On the Syntactic Composition of Manner and Motion . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar