Lexical Case

(1)

Case and Passive in Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar

Case and Passive

in Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar

Stefan M¨uller

Theoretische Linguistik/Computerlinguistik Fachbereich 10 Universität Bremen Institut für Linguistik Universität Potsdam Stefan.Mueller@cl.uni-bremen.de

December 2, 2005

Case and Passive in Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar Case

Case and Case Principles

•What kind of cases are there?

•How does case depend on the syntactic environment?

•Until now case was maximally specified in valency lists, if we now the principles of case assignment, this is unnecessary.

We capture generalizations and reduce the number of lexical entries for verbs likelesen(‘read’) in (1):

(1) a. Er he-nom

m¨ochte wants

das the

Buch book

lesen.

read

‘He wants to read the book.’

b. Ich I

sah saw

ihn him-acc

das the

Buch book

lesen.

read

‘I saw him read the book.’

The case of the subject (and the object) is assigned by a principle.

c

Stefan M¨uller 2005, CL, FB 10, Universit¨at Bremen & CL, Uni Potsdam 1/61

Case Structural vs. Lexical Case

Structural Case

Structural and Lexical Case

•If the case of an argument depends on the syntactic environment, the case is called structural case. Otherwise the argument has lexical case.

•Examples for structural case are:

(2) a. Der the

Installateur plumber-nom

kommt.

comes b. Der

the Mann man-nom

l¨aßt lets den the

Installateur plumber-acc

kommen.

come c. das

the Kommen coming

des of.the

Installateurs plumber-gen

•In (2) we have a subject that changes case, in (3) it is the object:

(3) a. Karl Karl

schl¨agt beats

den the

Hund.

dog-acc b. Der

the Hund dog

wird is

geschlagen.

beaten c

Structural vs. Lexical Case Lexical Case

Genitive

Lexical Case

•Genitive that depends on a verb is a lexical case:

The case of the genetive object does not change in passives.

(4) a. Wir we-nom

gedenken remember

der the

Opfer.

victims-gen b. Der

the Opfer victims-gen

wird is

gedacht.

remembered c. * Die

the Opfer victims-nom

wird/werden is/are

gedacht.

remembered (4b) = impersonal passiv, there is no subject

c

(2)

Dative

Is the Dative a Lexical Case?

•No change with dative objects:

(5) a. Der the

Mann man

hat has

ihm him-dat

geholfen.

helped b. Ihm

him-dat wird was

geholfen.

helped

•But what about (6)?

(6) a. Der the

Mann man-nom

hat has

den the

Ball ball-acc

dem the

Jungen boy-dat

geschenkt.

given

‘The man gave the ball to the boy as a present.’

b. Der the

Junge boy-nom

bekam became

den the

Ball ball-acc

geschenkt.

given

c

Dative

Is the Dative a Lexical Case?

•The status of the dative is still a controversial issue.

Three possibilities for dative arguments:

1. All datives are lexical.

2. Some are lexical others structural.

3. All datives are structural.

c

Dative

Dative as a Lexical Case

•If we treat dative as a lexical case, we have to assume that lexical case can be changed into structural case in the dative passive.

•With lexical dative Haider’s examples in (7) and (8) are explained (Haider, 1986, p. 20):

(7) a. Er he-nom

streichelt strokes

den the

Hund.

dog-acc b. Der

the Hund dog-nom

wurde was

gestreichelt.

stroked c. sein

his Streicheln stroking

des of.the

Hundes dog-gen (8) a. Er

he-nom hilft helps den the

Kindern.

children-dat b. Den

the Kindern children-dat

wurde was

geholfen.

helped

‘The children were helped.’

c. das the

Helfen helping der of.the

Kinder children-gen d. * sein

his Helfen helping der of.the

Kinder children-gen c

Dative

Structural Case and Bivalent Verbs

•If the only difference betweenhelfenandunterst¨utzenis the case, one of the cases has to be lexical.

(9) a. Er he-nom

hilft helps

ihm.

him-dat b. Er

he-nom unterst¨utzt supports

ihn.

him-acc

Von Stechow and Sternefeld (1988) and von Stechow (1990) and authors who see the structural/lexical case issue from a semantic point of view (Kaufmann, 1995; Stiebels, 1996; Olsen, 1997; Rapp, 1997) therefore assume that the dative of bivalent verbs is a lexical dative.

c

(3)

Dative

Dative Passive with Bivalent Verbs

•The case of ditransitive verbs can be derived by principles, but this is impossible with bivalent verbs (unless one has complex semantic strories).

→Dative withhelfenis said to be lexical.

Prediction: dative passive is impossible with such verbs.

•Wegener (1985; 1990) provides the examples in (10):

(10) a. Er he

kriegte got

von by

vielen many

geholfen helped

/ gratuliert congratulated

/ applaudiert.

applauded

‘Many helped / congratulated / applauded him.’

b. Man one

kriegt gets

t¨aglich daily

gedankt.

thanked

‘One is thanked on a daily basis.’

c

Dative

Dative Passive with Bivalent Verbs (Corpus Examples)

(11) a.”Da there

kriege get

ich I

geholfen.“¹ helped

‘Somebody helps me there.’

b.”Kl¨arle“

Kl¨arle h¨atte had

es it

wirklich really

mehr more als than

verdient, deserved

auch also

mal once

zu to

einem a

”unrunden“

insignificant Geburtstag birthday

gratuliert congratulated

zu to

bekommen.² get

‘Kl¨arle would have more than deserved to be wished a happy birthday, even an insignificant birthday.’

c. Mit with

dem the

alten old

Titel song

von by

Elvis Elvis

Presley Presley

[. . . ] bekam got

Kassier cashier

Markus Markus

Reiß Riss zum

to.the Geburtstag birthday

gratuliert, congratulated

[. . . ]³

‘The cashier Markus Riss was wished a happy birthday with the old Elvis Presley song [. . . ].’

1Frankfurter Rundschau, 26.06.1998, p. 7.

c

Accusative

We already saw structural accusatives, but there is also lexical accusative:

(12) a. Ihn him-acc

d¨urstet.

is.thirsty b. Die

the Mutter mother

lehrte taught

ihre her

Tochter daughter-acc

ein a

neues new

Lied.

song-acc

c

Adjectival Environments

Lexical Case in Adjectival Environments (I)

The case of objects that depend n adjectives does not change.

Adjectives may assign genitive and dative:

(13) a. Ich I

war was

mir me-dat

dessen that-gen

sicher.

sure

‘I was sure of this.’

b. Sie she ist is

ihm him-dat

treu.

faithful

‘She is faithful to him.’

c

(4)

Lexical Case in Adjectival Environments (II)

Accusative is also possible, but not so frequent (Haider, 1985):

(14) a. Das this ist is

diesen this

Preis price

nicht not

wert.

worth

‘This is not worth this price.’

b. Der the

Student student ist is

das the

Leben live

im in.the

Wohnheim dormitory

nicht not

gewohnt.⁴ used

‘The student is not used to the live in the dormitory.’

c. Du you

bist are

mir me

eine an

Erkl¨arung explanation

schuldig.⁵ owe

‘You owe me an explanation.’

4(Helbig and Buscha, 1972) 5(Heidolph et al., 1981) c

Structural Case in Adjectival Environments

The case of the subject of an adjective depneds on the syntactic environment (Wunderlich, 1984):

(15) a. Der the

Mond moon-nom

wurde got

kleiner.

smaller b. Er

he sah saw

den the

Mond moon-acc

kleiner smaller

werden.

get

‘He saw how the moon got smaller.’

c

The Case of Unrealized Subjects

The Case of Unrealized Subjects (I)

H¨ohle (1983, Chapter 6):

The case of elements that do not surface can be determined.

ein- nach d- ander-(‘one after the other’) may refere to constituents with plural reference.

Case and gender has to agree with the antecedent phrase.

c

The Case of Unrealized Subjects (II)

We have reference to subjects and objects in (16):

(16) a. [Die the

T¨uren]i doors-nom-pl-fem

sind are

[eine one-nom-fem

nach after der the-dat-fem

anderen]i other

kaputt broke

gegangen.

went

‘The doors broke one after another.’

b. [Einer one-nom-mas

nach after dem the-dat-mas

anderen]i other

haben have

wiri we-nom

die the

Burschen lads-acc

runtergeputzt.

down.cleaned

‘We took turns in bringing the lads down a peg or two.’

c. [Einen one-acc-mas

nach after

dem the-dat-mas

anderen]i other

haben have

wir we-nom

[die the

Burschen]i lads-acc-pl-mas

runtergeputzt.

down.cleaned

‘One after the other, we brought the lads down a peg or two.’

d. Ich I

ließ let [die

the Burschen]i lads-acc-pl-mas

[einen one-acc-mas

nach after dem the-dat-mas

anderen]i other

einsteigen.

enter

‘I let the lads get in (get started) one after the other.’

e. [Uns]i us-dat

wurde was

[einer one-dat-fem

anderen]i other

der the

Stuhl chair vor before

die the T¨ur door

gesetzt.

set

‘We were given the sack one after the other.’

c

(5)

The Case of Unrealized Subjects (III)

In (17) we have reference to dative or accusative objects of embedded infinitives:

(17) a. Er he hat has uns us

gedroht, threatened

[die the

Burschen]i lads-acc-pl-mas

demn¨achst soon

[einen one-acc-mas

nach after dem

the-dat-mas anderen]i other

wegzuschicken.

away.to.send

‘He threatened us that soon he would send the lads away one after the other.’

b. Er he hat has

angek¨undigt, announced

[uns]i us-dat

dann then

[einer one-dat-fem

anderen]i other

den the Stuhl

chair vor before

die the T¨ur door zu to

setzen.

set

‘He announced that he would then sack us one after the other.’

c. Es it

ist is

n¨otig, necessary

[die the

Fenster]i, windows-acc-pl-neu

sobald as.soon es it

geht, goes

[eins one-acc-neu

nach after dem

the-dat-neu anderen]i other

auszutauschen.

to.exchange

‘It is necessary to exchange the windows one after the other, as soon as possible.’

c

The Case of Unrealized Subjects (IV)

Reference to the subject of the infinitival VP:

(18) a. Ich I

habe have

[den the

Burschen]i lads-dat-pl-mas

geraten, advised im in.the

Abstand distance von of

wenigen few

Tagen days [einer

one-nom-mas nach after dem the-dat-mas

anderen]i other

zu to

k¨undigen.

hand.in.their.notice

‘I advised the lads to hand in their notice one after the other, at intervals of a few days.’

b. [Die the

T¨uren]i doors-nom-pl-fem

sind are

viel much

zu too

wertvoll, precious um compl

[eine one-nom-fem

nach after der

the-dat-fem anderen]i other

verheizt burnt

zu to

werden.

be

‘The doors are much too precious to be burnt one after the other.’

c. [Wir]i we-nom-pl

sind are

es itextra

leid, tired

[eine one-nom-fem

anderen]i other

den the

Stuhl chair vor

before die the T¨ur door

gesetzt set

zu to

kriegen.

get

‘We are tired of being given the sack one after the other.’

ein- nach d- ander-is nominative→Subjects are nominative as well.

c

The Case of Unrealized Subjects (V)

We have to make sure that non-realized subjects get case. If the case of the subject would be left unspecified, sentences like (19) would get a wrong reading:

(19) # Ich I

habe have

den the

Burschen lads-dat-mas

geraten, advised im in.the

Abstand distance

von of

wenigen few Tagen

days einen

one-acc-mas nach after

dem the-dat-mas

anderen other

zu to

k¨undigen.

fire

‘I advised the lads to fire (them) one after the other, at intervals of a few days.’

einen nach dem anderenis the object ofk¨undigenand cannot refer to the subject of the infinitive, which is coreferential withden Burschen.

c

Stefan M¨uller 2005, CL, FB 10, Universit¨at Bremen & CL, Uni Potsdam 18/61 Case

The Analysis The Case Principle

The Case Principle (I)

•Dative is treated as a lexical case.

•ditransitive verbs likegeben(‘give’) have the followingsubcatvalue:

(20) hNP[str], NP[str], NP[ldat]i str= structural case,ldat= lexical dative.

•The assignment of structural case is done via the following principle (Przepi´orkowski, 1999b; Meurers, 1999):

Case Principle:

•In a list that contains both the subject and the complements of a verbal head, the least oblique element with structural case gets nominative, unless it is raised by a higher head.

•All other elements that have structural case and are not raised get accusative.

•In nominal environments, elements with structural case get genitive.

c

(6)

Case The Analysis

The Case Principle

The Case Principle (II)

•This principle is similar to the one by Yip, Maling and Jackendoff (1987) and therefore can explain the case facts of the languages that were discussed by these authors, in particular the complicated case system of Icelandic.

•An important difference is that the principle above is monotonic, i.e. case that was assigned cannot be changed by a higher predicate.

c

Stefan M¨uller 2005, CL, FB 10, Universit¨at Bremen & CL, Uni Potsdam 20/61 Case

The Analysis Active

Active

prototypical valency lists:

(21) a.schl¨aft(‘sleeps’): subcathNP[str]ji b.unterst¨utzt(‘supports’):subcathNP[str]j, NP[str]ki c.hilft(‘helps’): subcathNP[str]j, NP[ldat]ki d.schenkt(‘gives as . . . ’):subcathNP[str]j, NP[str]k, NP[ldat]li The first element in thesubcat-Liste gets nominative.

All other elements with structural case get accusative.

c

The Analysis Passive

Agentive Passive

Passive

(22) a.schl¨aft(‘sleeps’): subcathNP[str]ji b.unterst¨utzt(‘supports’):subcathNP[str]j, NP[str]ki c.hilft(‘helps’): subcathNP[str]j, NP[ldat]ki d.schenkt(‘gives as . . . ’):subcathNP[str]j, NP[str]k, NP[ldat]li When these verbs get passivized, we get the followingsubcatlists:

(23) a.geschlafen wird:subcath i b.unterst¨utzt wird:subcathNP[str]ki c.geholfen wird: subcathNP[ldat]ki d.geschenkt wird: subcathNP[str]k, NP[ldat]li The first position is occupied by a different NP in (23).

If this NP has structural case, it gets nominative,

if it has not (as in (23c)) the case remains the way it is, namely lexically specified.

c

Stefan M¨uller 2005, CL, FB 10, Universit¨at Bremen & CL, Uni Potsdam 22/61 The Analysis

Passive Dative Passive

Dative Passive

(24) c.hilft(‘helps’): subcathNP[str]j,NP[ldat]ki d.schenkt(‘gives as . . . ’):subcathNP[str]j, NP[str]k,NP[ldat]li The dative argument becomes the first argument and

the lexical dative of the embedded verb is turned into a structural case:

(25) a.geholfen bekommt: subcathNP[str]ki b.geschenkt bekommt:subcathNP[str]l, NP[str]ki The former dative argument is now in first position.

Since it has structural case, it gets assigned nominative.

In (25b), the second element (the direct object) gets accusative.

This change of lexical case into structural case is not nice, but there seems to be no better way.

c

(7)

The AcI Construction

The AcI Construction (I)

(26) a.schl¨aft(‘sleeps’): subcathNP[str]ji b.unterst¨utzt(‘supports’):subcathNP[str]j, NP[str]ki c.hilft(‘helps’): subcathNP[str]j, NP[ldat]ki d.schenkt(‘gives as . . . ’):subcathNP[str]j, NP[str]k, NP[ldat]li The AcI Construction is analyzed as argument composition:

the arguments of the embedded verb become arguments of the AcI verb:

(27) a.schlafen läßt: subcathNP[str]i, NP[str]ji b.unterstützen läßt:subcathNP[str]i, NP[str]j, NP[str]ki c.helfen läßt: subcathNP[str]i, NP[str]j, NP[ldat]ki d.schenken läßt: subcathNP[str]i, NP[str]j, NP[str]k, NP[ldat]li NP[str]istands for the subject of the AcI verb.

NP[str]j, NP[str]kand NP[ldat]lare the arguments of the embedded verbs.

c

Passive The AcI Construction

The AcI Construction (II)

(28) a.schlafen läßt: subcathNP[str]i, NP[str]ji b.unterstützen läßt:subcathNP[str]i, NP[str]j, NP[str]ki c.helfen läßt: subcathNP[str]i, NP[str]j, NP[ldat]ki d.schenken läßt: subcathNP[str]i, NP[str]j, NP[str]k, NP[ldat]li Only the valency lists in (28) are relevant for case assignment.

The elements in the valnecy representations of the base verbs are irrelevant, since the case principle does not assign case to elements that are raised.

The first element in the lists in (28) gets nominative, the remaining elements with structural case get accusative.

Hence, the logical subjects of the embedded Vs get realized in accusative.

c

Subjects of Adjectives

The case assignment to the subject of adjectives work analoguosly.

The copula is combined with the adjective and we get a valency list that contains the arguments of the adjective (29a).

If such a complex is embedded under an AcI verb we get (29b):

(29) a.kleiner werden: subcathNP[str]ji

‘smaller become’

b.kleiner werden sah: subcathNP[str]i, NP[str]ji

‘smaller become saw’

The first NP gets nominative, the second one accusative.

c

Summary

Intermediate Summary

•Case is assigned on a valence representation (heresubcat, in other HPSG publicationsarg-st).

•There is no zero case for non-realized subjects, these elements get case according to the normal principles.

c

(8)

Passive The Phenomenon

Agentive Passive

“personal” passive:

(30) a. weil because

Karl Karl-nom

den the

Schrank cupboard-acc

¨offnet opens b. weil

because der the

Schrank cupboard-nom

ge¨offnet opened

wird.

is

‘because the cupboard is opened.’

“impersonal” passive:

Karl Karl-nom

arbeitet works b. weil

because gearbeitet worked

wird.

is

‘because it is worked.’

c

Stefan M¨uller 2005, CL, FB 10, Universit¨at Bremen & CL, Uni Potsdam 28/61 Passive

The Phenomenon Dative Passive

Dative Passive

(32) a. weil

because Peter Peter-nom

dem the

Jungen boy-dat

den the

Ball ball-acc

wegnimmt away.take

‘Peter takes away the ball from the boy.’

b. weil because

der the

Junge boy-nom

den the

Ball ball-acc

weggenommen away.taken

bekommt gets

‘The ball is taken away from the boy.’

c

lassen Passive

lassen

Passive

er he-nom

einen an

Fachmann expert-acc

den the

Wagen car-acc

reparieren repair

l¨aßt lets

‘because he has an expert repair the car.’

b. weil because

er he-nom

den the

Wagen car-acc

(von by

einem an

Fachmann) expert

reparieren repair

l¨aßt lets

‘because he has an expert repair the car.’

c

The Phenomenon Modal Infinitives

Modal Infinitives

(34) a. weil

because ihr you-nom

den the

Aufsatz paper-acc

zu to

schreiben write

habt have

‘because you have to write the paper.’

b. weil because

der the

Aufsatz paper-nom

(von by

euch) you

zu to

schreiben write

ist is

‘because the paper is to be written by you.’

c

(9)

Morphological Identity of Forms (Participle)

The form of the participle is the same in the perfect, the agentive passive, the dative passive:

(35) a. Der the

Mann man-nom

hat has

den the

Ball ball-acc

dem the

Jungen boy-dat

geschenkt.

given

‘The man gave the ball to the boy.’

b. Der the

Ball ball-nom

wurde was

dem the

Jungen boy-dat

geschenkt.

given

‘The ball was given to the boy.’

c. Der the

Junge boy-nom

bekam got

den the

Ball ball-acc

geschenkt.

given

‘The boy got the ball as a present.’

c

The Phenomenon

Morphological Identity of Forms (Bare Infinitive)

The form of the bare infinitive is the same in the future, AcI,lassenpassive, and middle constructions:

ein a

Mechaniker mechanic-nom

den the

Wagen car-acc

reparieren repair

wird.

will

‘because the mechanic will repair the car.’

b. weil because

Karl Karl-nom

einen a

Mechaniker mechanic-acc

den the

Wagen car-acc

reparieren repair

l¨aßt.

lets

‘because Karl has the mechanic repair the car.’

c. weil because

Karl Karl-nom

den the

Wagen car-acc

(von by

einem a

Mechaniker) mechanic

reparieren repair

l¨aßt.

lets

‘because Karl has somebody / the mechanic repair the car.’

d. weil because

sich self der the

Wagen car-nom

nicht not

reparieren repair

l¨aßt.

lets

‘because it is impossible to repair the car.’

Forzuinfinitives, we also have two modal infinitive constructions with different argument realizations.

c

The Phenomenon Unaccusativity Passivizability

Unaccusativity: Passivizability

Although certain intransitive verbs allow passivization, there are others that do not allow the passive.

(37) a. daß that

der the

Zug train

ankam arrived b. * Dort

there wurde was

angekommen.

arrived c. daß

the der the

Mann man

ihr her

auffiel noticed

‘She noticed the man.’

d. * Ihr her-dat

wurde was

aufgefallen.

noticed Caution:

Not all verbs that cannot be passivized belong to the same class!

c

Stefan M¨uller 2005, CL, FB 10, Universit¨at Bremen & CL, Uni Potsdam 34/61 The Phenomenon

Unaccusativity Adjectival Participles (I)

Adjectival Participles

Such verbs can be used as prenominal adjectival participles:

(38) a. der the

angekommene arrived

Zug train b. dem

the Regime regime-dat

aufgefallene

part.fell ”Vaterlandsverr¨ater“⁶ traitors.to.their.country

‘the “traitors to their country” noticed by the regime’

The subject role of the particple is filled be the modified noun.

6Die Zeit, 26.04.1985, p. 3.

c

(10)

The Phenomenon Unaccusativity

Adjectival Participles (I)

Adjectival Participles (II)

Transitive verbs are different:

The object role of the participle is filled by the modified noun:

(39) a. die the

geliebte loved

Frau woman b. der

the geschlagene beaten

Hund dog

Verbs that do not have an accusative object usually do not allow for adjectival particples:

(40) a. * der the

getanzte danced

Mann man b. * der

the

(ihm) geholfene him

Mann helped man

c

Unaccusativity Nominatives with Object Properties

Nominatives with Object Properties (I)

•Arguments of certain verbs that are nominative in active sentences have object properties.

•Such verbs are called unaccusative (Perlmutter, 1978) or ergative (see for instance Grewendorf, 1989).

•Grewendorf (1989): fourteen tests to differenciate between unaccusative and unergative/transitive verbs.

•Fanselow (1992) six additional tests

•Despite this big number of test researchers do not agree which verbs should be treated as unaccusative.

•Some tests produce contradicting results (M¨uller, 2002, In Preparation).

•Kaufmann (1995): Many differences btween unacc and trans/unerg verbs can be explained differently.

c

Nominatives with Object Properties

Nominatives with Object Properties (II)

•Data is explained if one assumes, that the subject of unaccusative verbs is an underlying object:

Passive = Suppression of the subject. No subject present→ passivization ofankommenandauffallenimpossible

•The formation of adjectival participles is possible, if there is an element with accusative object properties.

•Since the subjects ofankommena.auffallenare underlying objects, the well-formedness of the phrases in (41) is explained.

(41) a. der the

angekommene arrived

Zug train b. dem

the Regime regime-dat

aufgefallene

part.fell ”Vaterlandsverr¨ater“⁷ traitors.to.their.country

‘the “traitors to their country” noticed by the regime’

7Die Zeit, 26.04.1985, p. 3.

c

Unaccusativity Resultative Constructions

Resultative Constructions

Resultative Constructions: Verb + Accusative + Predicate (Wunderlich, 1997; M¨uller, 2002, Chapter 5):

(42) weil because

niemand nobody-nom

den the

Teich pond-acc

leer empty

fischt fishes

‘because nobody fishes the pond empty’

If the verbs are unergative,

the resultative predicate predicates over the accusative.

c

(11)

Resultative Constructions

Resultative Constructions with Unaccusative Verbs

Resultative predicate predicates over the subject of the verb:

(43) a. [. . . ] und and im in.the

Winter winter

fror froze

sein its

Wasser water

zu to

Eis.⁸ ice

‘and in the winter its water froze to ice.’

b. den the

Tonb¨andern tapes

im in.the

Archiv, archive die which

in in der the

tropischen tropical

Hitze heat

zu to

einer a schwarzen

black Masse mass

schmolzen.⁹ melted Data are explained,

if the result predicate predicates over the element with object properties.

Subjects in (43) are not normal subjects but underlying objects.

c

Case and Passive in Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar Passive

The Analysis

Two Strategies

•In principle, there are two strategies for tackling the passive problem:

1. One (or more) lexical entries for the perfect participle and the passive participle(s). (Bresnan, 1978, 1982; Pollard and Sag, 1987, p. 214–218;

Bierwisch, 1990, p. 189; Kunze, 1996, p. 656; Manning and Sag, 1998;

Michaelis and Ruppenhofer, 2001, Chapter 4; Vierhuff, Hildebrandt and Eikmeyer, 2003, p. 231)

2. One lexical entry for the participle that can be used in different environments. (Bech, 1955, p. 37; H¨ohle, 1978; Haider, 1986; Toman, 1986;

Fanselow, 1987, p. 165; Hoekstra, 1987, p. 283; von Stechow, 1990, p. 171)

•Solution 1: Lexical rules that map active to passive forms or stems to various participles.

•Solution 2: Argument Attraction: The auxiliary determines which arguments of the embedded verb are realized and determines the form.

•Argument for 2: No variation in morphological form.

c

The Analysis Preliminaries

The Subject of Non-Finite Verbs

•Subject of non-finite verbs is not represented in thesubcat-Liste, but undersubj

(Borsley, 1989; Pollard, 1996; Kiss, 1992, 1995)

•VPs are maximal projections (uniform treatment of extraposition): A neccessary condition for extraposition is maximality.

•The lexicon contains stems that have all their arguments onsubcat.

The stem is mapped onto inflected forms and the subject of infinitives with and withoutzuis not represented in thesubcatof the output, but undersubj.

c

Preliminaries The Subject of Non-Finite Verbs

The Verbal Complex

•I assume that auxiliaries and embedded verb form a complex.

•The embedding verb takes over all arguments from the embedded verb.

•More motivation tomorrow.

c

(12)

The Analysis Preliminaries

Lexical Entry for the Future Auxiliary

•werdenselects a verb inbseform, that is an infinitive withoutzu.

(44) wird(Futur Auxiliary):





 head verb

subcat1⊕2⊕ hV[bse, subj1, subcat2]i cat







•wirdtakes over the description of the arguments ofhelfen(Karl,mir):

(45) daß that

Karl Karl mir me

helfen help

wird will

‘that Karl will help me’

Thesubcat-Liste ofhelfen wirdhas the same form as the one ofhilft.

•The auxiliary attracts the arguments of the embedded verb.

(argument attraction, argument composition).

c

Preliminaries

Lexical Entry for the Future Auxiliary

Analysis of

helfen wird

(‘help will’)

"

head 1 subcat2⊕3

#

CL H

4





 loc





 head







subj 2hNP[nom]i vformbse verb





 subcat3hNP[dat]i

















 head 1





 subj h i vformfin verb







subcat2⊕3⊕ h4i







helfen wird

c

Passive The Analysis

The Representation of Unaccusativity

Unaccusative, Unergative, and Transitive Verbs

•Haider (1986): Argument with subject properties (the designated argument) is marked in the argument structure of the verb.

•The subject of unergative and transitive verbs is the designated argument.

Unaccusative verbs do not have a designated argument.

•Heinz and Matiasek (1994) and Lebeth (1994) use a list-valued featuredafor the representation of the designated argument.

If there is a designated argument, it is a member of both thedaand thesubcat-Liste:

da subcat

ankommen (unaccusative): hi hNP[str]i

tanzen (unergative): h1NP[str]i h1i auffallen (unaccusative): hi hNP[str], NP[ldat]i lieben (transitive): h1NP[str]i h1, NP[str]i schenken (ditransitive): h1NP[str]i h1, NP[str], NP[ldat]i helfen (unergative): h1NP[str]i h1, NP[ldat]i c

The Analysis Agentive Passive

Agentive Passive

•Haider: The designated argument of the participle is blocked.

•If the participle is used in the passive, the designated argument remains blocked. If the participle is used in the perfect, the perfect auxiliary deblocks the blocked element.

subj subcat

angekommen (unaccusative): hi hNP[str]i

getanzt (unergative): hNP[str]i hi

aufgefallen (unaccusative): hi hNP[str], NP[ldat]i geliebt (transitive): hNP[str]i hNP[str]i geschenkt (ditransitive): hNP[str]i hNP[str], NP[ldat]i geholfen (unergative): hNP[str]i hNP[ldat]i

c

(13)

Agentive Passive

Argument Blocking Lexical Rule for Participles

•Argument blocking lexical rule for participles:





 . . .





 head

"

da1

verb

#

subcat1⊕2







stem





 7→





 . . .





 head





 vformppp subj 1

verb





 subcat2







word







•The LR brackes thesubcat-Liste of the input into two parts:

The part that corresponds to thedalist and a rest.

•Only the rest is represented as thesubcatvalue of the output.

Thedalist is identified with thesubj-Liste of the output verb.

c

The Passive Auxiliary (I)

•werden(Passive Auxiliary):

"

da hi

subcat1⊕ hV[ppp, dahNPi, subcat1]i

#

The passive auxilary selects a particple and attracts its arguments.

(The logical subject of the participle is blocked)

•Auxiliary requires the particple to have a designated argument (an element in theda-Liste).

This excludes passivization of unaccusative verbs, since these do not have anything inda.

c

Agentive Passive

The Passive Auxiliary (II)

•The entry explains both the personal and the impersonal passive:

"

da hi

subcat1⊕ hV[ppp, dahNPi, subcat1]i

#

The followingsubcatlists result after verb complex formation:

geschlafen wird: subcath i unterst¨utzt wird:subcathNP[str]ki geholfen wird: subcathNP[ldat]ki geschenkt wird: subcathNP[str]k, NP[ldat]li

•The case principle takes care of the correct case assignment.

(➚Case Principle)

c

Exclusion of Double Passives

Without restrictions one could form a passive from (46b), which would be the impersonal passive in (46c).

sie she

den the

Mann movie

liebt loves b. weil

because der the

Mann man

geliebt loved

wurde was c. * weil

because geliebt loved

worden been

wurde was Thedavalue of the passive auxiliary is the empty list.

Therefore the combination of the auxiliary and the participle is parallel to unaccusative simplex verbs.

Since the passive auxiliary does not allow for the embedding of unaccusatives,geliebt wordencannot be embedded underwurdein (46c).

c

(14)

Perfect

•The perfect auxiliary deblocks the designated argument.

haben(Perfect Auxiliary):

subcat1⊕2⊕ hV[ppp, subj1, subcat2]i

•It attracts the concatenation of thesubjvalue and thesubcat-Liste of the embedded verb.

•The blocked designated argument is reintroduced into thesubcat-Liste by the auxiliary.

c

The Analysis Perfect

The Perfect Auxiliary

sein

•Similar tohaben, but does not deblock the designated argument of the embedded participle:

(47) sein(Perfect Auxiliary):

subcat1⊕ hV[ppp, subcat1]i

Since nothing was blocked during the formation of particples of verbs likeangekommenandaufgefallen,

nothing has to be deblocked for the perfect.

c

The Dative Passive

bekommen(Dative Passive Auxiliary):





 da h i subcatD

1NP[str]₂E

⊕3⊕4⊕

*V[ppp,dahNPi, subcat3⊕D

NP[ldat]₂E

⊕4] +







•The embedded verb has to have an element inda.

•All non-blocked arguments except the dative are directly raised.

•The dative element is coindexed with an NP with structural case.

c

The Analysis Modal Infinitives

Modal Infinitives

I follow Haider in assuming that infinitives differ from participles in that the logical subject rather then the designated argument is blocked.

da subcat subj

a. anzukommen (unaccusative):hi hi hNP[str]i

b. zu tanzen (unergative): h1NP[str]i hi h1i c. aufzufallen (unaccusative): hi hNP[ldat]i hNP[str]i d. zu lieben (transitive): h1NP[str]i hNP[str]i h1i e. zu schenken (ditransitive): h1NP[str]i hNP[str], NP[ldat]i h1i f. zu helfen (unergative): h1NP[str]i hNP[ldat]i h1i

c

(15)

Modal Infinitives

The Argument Blocking Lexical Rule

(48) Argument blocking lexical rule for infinitives with and withoutzu:





 . . .

"

head verb subcat1

#

stem





7→





 . . .





 head







vforminf-or-bse subj 2

verb





 subcat3







word







∧first-np-str(1,2,3) The subject is not directly marked in the lexicon by a feature.

The element that is represented undersubj

is the first NP in thesubcat-Liste that has structural case.

c

The Analysis Modal Infinitives

The Auxiliaries

The auxiliaries are parallel to what we saw for the perfect:habendeblocks the element insubj,seinleaves blocked elements untouched.

ihr you-nom

den the

Aufsatz paper-acc

zu to

schreiben write

habt have

‘because you have to write the paper.’

b. weil because

der the

Aufsatz paper-nom

(von by

euch) you

zu to

schreiben write

ist is

‘because the paper is to be written by you.’

c

The lassen Passive

The

lassen

Passive

lass-(Passive Version):





head|dah1i

subcat h1NP[str]i ⊕2⊕D

V[bse, dahNPi, subcat2]E





•lassenrequires the embedded verb to have ada.

•It raises all arguments that are not blocked.

•It introduces its own argument.

•The case principle does the rest.

c

The Analysis Adjectival Participles

Adjectival Participles

Adjective Derivation Rule for Participles:





 . . .





 head

"

vformppp verb

#

subcath1NP[str]i ⊕2







word





 7→





 . . .





 head

"

subjh1i adj

#

subcat2







stem







•The lexical rule maps a participle onto an adjective stem.

•The designated argument of the participle is blocked, if there is any.

•Therefore the element at the first position of thesubcat-Liste is the element with object properties (the direct object of transitive verbs and the subject of unaccusative verbs).

c