On the Syntactic Representation of Events
Tal SiloniTo appear In Robert Truswell (ed.) Handbook of Event Structure. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Abstract
A recurrent idea in linguistic theory is that predicates have complex syntactic representations that reflect their semantics. In the past twenty years or so linguistic theory has witnessed the return of lexical, or rather syntactic, decomposition approaches, which compose event structure from its meaning ingredients instantiated as distinct syntactic heads. These are essentially modernized versions of the proposals of Generative Semantics (McCawley 1968, Lakoff 1965), which answer many of the empirical objections to decomposition. This paper examines the decompositional project, concentrating on the various arguments presented in modern literature for a decompositional treatment of the relationship between pairs of verbs that differ roughly in that one of them has one more argument than the other. The paper shows that such pairs or alternations split into several types, only one of which deserves a decompositional analysis. Our litmus test for decomposition can be defined as follows: A meaning ingredient is a syntactic head, iff it is detectable by syntactic diagnostics.
Related papers
The event argument and the semantics of verbs
Ms. University of Massachusetts at Amherst.[ …, 2003
basic lexical items without being given explicit definitions or instructions. I will explore the consequences of one such hypothetical constraint, the Cumulativity Universal, which was originally proposed by Manfred Krifka and has since been pursued extensively by Fred Landman. The version of the Cumulativity Universal that is relevant here has it that the denotations of basic predicates at logical-conceptual structure are cumulative from the very start. If there is a basic logical-conceptual predicate 'red', for example, that is true of my hat and your scarf (two singularities), then the Cumulativity Universal says that that very same predicate is also true of the sum of my hat and your scarf (a plurality). Cumulativity extends to relational predicates. If the predicate 'buy', for example, is cumulative, then whenever it relates, say, some action of yours to your scarf, and some action of mine to my hat, it also relates the sum of our buying actions to the sum of what we each bought. Suppose there was independent support in favor of the Cumulativity Universal. This would be of great importance for us since, as we will see shortly, the Cumulativity Universal immediately disqualifies the 'theme' or 'object' relation and a significant number of other object related thematic relations from being possible denotations of thematic role predicates at logical-conceptual structure, and thus at any level of syntactic representation. I will use this fact to argue that, in all likelihood, there are verbs whose direct objects are not neo-Davidsonian at any level of mental representation. The Cumulativity Universal is far from being uncontroversial. I will thus launch a detailed defense of it in chapters 4 and 5. It will be a long and complicated argument, fed by the work of many of the key players in this popular field of investigation. The argument will be of interest beyond the issues of argument association and semantic universals, however, revealing The Event Argument, Chapter 1. Angelika Kratzer December 2002. 13 many not at all obvious consequences of Davidsonian event semantics including some relating to the placement possibilities of quantifier phrases and adverbials within a verb's extended projection. Last not least, the discussion of cumulativity might shed some light on the nature of verbal number agreement, and thus ultimately help us understand the connection between voice and verbal agreement. Like many longwinded arguments, then, that one too, will open up unexpected vistas into new and uncharted terrains that will guide subsequent excursions. Returning to argument association in the syntax, what kind of facts could give us information about the way arguments are linked to their heads in that central component of the grammar? Optionality of arguments is a possible diagnostic for neo-Davidsonian association, as pointed out in Dowty 1989. Dowty notes that some event nouns do not show any real subcategorization, and suggests that this could be explained by assuming that in contrast to verb arguments, the arguments of those nouns are associated by the neo-Davidsonian method in the syntax. Here is the example he considers: (2) a. Gifts of books from John to Mary would surprise Helen. b. Gifts of books from John would surprise Helen. c. Gifts of books to Mary would surprise Helen. d. Gifts from John to Mary would surprise Helen. e. Gifts from John would surprise Helen. f. Gifts of books would surprise Helen. g. Gifts to Mary would surprise Helen. h. Gifts would surprise Helen.
Some remarks on event structure, conceptual spaces and the semantics of verbs
Theoretical Linguistics, 2012
Event Structure and the Encoding of Arguments: The Syntax of the Mandarin and English Verb Phrase
This work presents a theory of linguistic representation that attempts to capture the syntactic structure of verbs and their arguments. My framework is based on the assumption that the proper representation of argument structure is event structure. Furthermore, I develop the hypothesis that event structure is syntactic structure, and argue that verb meanings are compositionally derived in the syntax from verbalizing heads, functional elements that license eventive interpretations, and verbal roots, abstract concepts drawn from encyclopedic knowledge. The overall goal of the enterprise is to develop a theory that is able to transparently relate the structure and meaning of verbal arguments. By hypothesis, languages share the same inventory of primitive building blocks and are governed by the same set of constraints-all endowed by principles of Universal Grammar and subjected to parametric variations. Support for my theory is drawn from both Mandarin Chinese and English. In particular, the organization of the Mandarin verbal system provides strong evidence for the claim that activity and state are the only two primitive verb types in Chineseachievements and accomplishments are syntactically-derived complex categories. As a specific instance of complex event composition, I examine Mandarin resultative verb compounds and demonstrate that a broad range of variations can be perspicuously captured in my framework. I show that patterns of argument sharing in these verbal compounds can be analyzed as control, thus grounding argument structure in wellknown syntactic constraints such as the Minimum Distance Principle. Finally, I argue that cross-linguistic differences in the realization of verbal arguments can be reduced to variations in the way functional elements interact with verbal roots. Overall, my work not only contributes to our understanding of how events are syntactically represented, but also explicates interactions at the syntax-semantics interface, clarifying the relationship between surface form, syntactic structure, and logical form. A theory of argument structure grounded in independently-motivated syntactic constraints, on the one hand, and the semantic structure of events, on the other hand, is able to account for a wide range of empirical facts with few stipulations.
Composite Event Structures and Complex Predicates A Template-based Approach to Argument Selection
2000
Baker's syntactic account of compounding relies crucially on the premise that the first verb subcategorizes the second verb (phrase) and hence could license head-movement and incorporation. However, this approach leads to problematic cases. For instance, Li (1990a) observes that not all heads of complements can be incorporated.
The syntactic representation of understood subjects
<i>WORD</i>, 1999
Every theory of grammar must employ a certain degree of abstraction. Theories have, however, differed with regard to the abstract elements they use and the distance of their grammatical representations from the physical data they are intended to explain. The present article deals with the question of absent verb subjects which must be supplied for full interpretation. Some recent work in syntax has included such subjects as formal elements within syntactic representations. Both the reality and the utility of such constructs are called into question here, and an alternative analysis is presented which obviates the need for this device.
Determinants of event type in Persian complex predicates
Lingua, 2005
In this paper we analyse the interdependence of Persian nonverbal (NV) elements and the light verb (LV) in determining the syntactic properties, the event structure, and the alternation possibilities of the entire complex predicate (CP). We argue that these properties provide strong evidence for a constructionalist approach to such phenomena, like that of Keyser (1993, 2002), and that the combination of compositionality and syntactic independence effects observed in these constructions, are difficult, if not impossible, to deal with in a projectionist approach. # structure of its heavy counterpart. Furthermore, although the LV determines the agentivity (xordan 'collide' versus zadan 'hit') and the eventiveness of the CPr, it fails to completely determine its event structure and telicity. Thus, depending on the NV element, the same LV may occur in different types of event structure. For example, the LV xordan 'collide' may occur in both accomplishment and achievement complex predicates, while the LV zadan 'hit' can occur in activity, accomplishment, and semelfactive complex predicates, when combined with different NV elements. We argue that when the LV allows for event type variation (as in the case of xordan 'collide'), it is the category of the NV element that determines the event structure of the whole CPr. That is, if the NV element is a noun, the CPr is atelic (activity or semelfactive), unless the noun is itself eventive (see Section 5), in which case the CPr may be telic (accomplishment)). If the NV element is an adjective, an adverbial particle, or a prepositional phrase, the CPr is telic (accomplishment or achievement). This is summarized in (1):
Related papers
The syntactic representation of linguistic events
The Latest in Linguistics
This year Glot International starts featuring a squib section. We invite everybody to send us squibs on any subject in any field of "theoretical" linguistics. Since we appear monthly (almost!) and our production time is relatively short, we will be able to publish squibs very soon after their acceptance. The review procedure we have set up is also geared at losing as little time as possible. What squibs are? What squibs do? Squibs inspire. They present ideas, yet to be fleshed outbut one at the time. They find connections between facts that nobody ever thought were related. They spell out the beginning of a new analysis, not necessarily daring. They give you new facts from old languages and old facts in a new guise. They come up with beautiful observations that somehow seem theoretically relevant as well. They tell you about wonderful problems and -possibly -only hint at a solution. And they have the length of one page in Glot International, which is about 1500 words (including the references!). We are looking forward to your submission. Send us three hard copies and one soft copy to the addresses on page 2. Before sending us anything, please consult the Guidelines for authors on our web site (www.hagpub.com/glot.htm) or send us an e-mail if you prefer to receive the Guidelines by e-mail or regular mail.
Semantic relationships between verbs and their arguments
Language Sciences, 1996
In English and Hungarian there are some verbs and constructions that do not allow definite arguments in certain positions (Definiteness Effect). This phenomenon is related to the ambiguous, weak or strong interpretation of indefinite noun phrases. In Hungarian productive noun incorporation is possible if the verb exhibits the definiteness restriction. In this paper a model-theoretic account of these phenomena will be presented. Two disjunct structures of entities (objects and events) are used for modelling nominal and verbal denotations. The direction and other properties of the functions linking them will give an explanation to the peculiarities of the linguistic data examined. It is shown that the seemingly different constraints can be traced back to the same general mathematical properties of the semantic model.
States in the decomposition of verbal predicates
Natural Language & Linguistic Theory
This paper proposes a new diagnostic for the detection of stative sub-events in the decomposition of verbal predicates. The diagnostic is based on a certain type of presupposition triggered by additive operators like Greek ke ‘also’, which we call Stative Presuppositions. It is argued that the generation of such Stative Presuppositions requires the existence of a syntactically accessible constituent that denotes a predicate of states that additive operators can take scope over. We investigate the distribution of Stative Presuppositions and observe that not all verbs that support inferences to a result state give rise to them. Based on this distribution we argue for a non-uniform analysis of result verbs; whereas some verbs require an event-decompositional analysis, others are better captured by scalar- and incrementality-based analyses. We cast our analysis in the framework of Distributed Morphology and propose to explain non-uniformity based on how different types of verbal roots i...
Two approaches to the semantic decomposition of change of state verbs, how they differ, and why it matters
Glossa, 2024
In this paper, I contrast two broad decompositional approaches to verb semantics. One, especially associated with David Dowty, involves translating verbs using a set of precisely interpreted primitive predicates such as CAUSE and BECOME, in order to facilitate semantic generalizations such as patterns of entailment between sentences. Another, with multiple origins in both temporal semantics and theories of the syntax/semantics interface (including, notably, work by Pustejovsky and Piñón), involves developing a theory of the internal part structure of the eventualities that verbs and other expressions describe; I refer to this approach, following Pianesi and Varzi, as mereotopological. These two approaches to decomposition are not, strictly speaking, incompatible, and they have sometimes been combined; however, perhaps surprisingly, comparison of them has been unsystematic. I address this gap by describing more systematically how the approaches differ from each other, illustrating with differences in the insights they offer into specific aspects of the semantics of simple change of state verbs and unselected object resultatives. I especially aim to promote interest in the development of more sophisticated, cross-linguistically applicable theories of so-called event structure through appeal to a wider range of notions from mereotopology.
The interaction of compositional semantics and event semantics
Davidsonian event semantics is often taken to form an unhappy marriage with compositional semantics. For example, it has been claimed to be problematic for semantic accounts of quantification (Beaver & Condoravdi, 2007), for classical accounts of negation (Krifka, 1989), and for intersective accounts of verbal coordination (Lasersohn, 1995). This paper shows that none of this is the case, once we abandon the idea that the event variable is bound at sentence level, and assume instead that verbs denote existential quantifiers over events. Quantificational arguments can then be given a semantic account, negation can be treated classically, and coordination can be modeled as intersection. The framework presented here is a natural choice for researchers and fieldworkers who wish to sketch a semantic analysis of a language without being forced to make commitments about the hierarchical order of arguments, the argument-adjunct distinction, the default scope of quantifiers, or the nature of negation and coordination.
The (de)composition of event predicates (with Boban Arsenijević & Rafael Marín)
Studies in the Composition and Decomposition of Event Predicates, ed. B. Arsenijevic, B. Gehrke, R. Marín, Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy 93, 1-27, Springer., 2013
This chapter offers an overview of the advancements made in the semantic theory of events and introduces its central notions and current issues to serve as background information relevant for the contributions included in the volume. It is structured around two main axes: compositional and decompositional approaches to the semantics of event predicates. We argue that, while composition and decomposition are at times treated as two competing ways to deal with the semantics of event predicates, they can actually be seen as two sides of the same coin, as essential parts of the subatomic semantics of event predicates. Along with these two axes, we address how adverbial modification served as modification for event semantics as well as its use as diagnostics for the structural complexity or for particular properties of eventualities, such as (a)telicity or scalarity.
The semantics of syntactic constructions
The Sign of the V: Papers in Honour of Sten Vikner, 2019
In this paper it is shown that Danish syntactic constructions, such as accusative + infi nitive, e.g. Hun så ham komme (She saw him come), accusative + to-infi nitive, that-clauses and preposition + that-clauses, have their own type of meaning potential, exactly like lexical items, such as perception predicates: see, hear, control predicates: permit, offer, and mental NEG-raising predicates: think, hope. The types of meaning that syntactic constructions can have as predications are: state of affairs, proposition, illocution and fact. Both lexical items and syntactic constructions are polysemous and disambiguate each other when combined in a clause according to a general rule that may be stated similarly to the way that the rule for a lexical entry may. Some examples such as Hun bad ham komme (She asked him to come) and Hun lod ham begrave (She let him be buried) are identifi ed and given an explanation.
A Minimalist Implementation of Verb Subcategorization
International Workshop on Parsing Technologies, 2001
Traditional accounts of verb subcategorization, from the classic work of Fillmore on, require either a considerable number of syntactic rules to account for diverse sentence constructions, including cross- language variation, or else complex linking rules mapping the thematic roles of semantic event templates with possible syntactic forms. In this paper we exhibit a third approach: we implement, via an explicit
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.