Scribd
Upload
71 views7 pages

Reference Processing 0

The document discusses high and low applicatives. [1] High applicatives relate an additional individual to the event described by the verb, like benefactive or malfactive relations. They introduce arguments with case. [2] Low applicatives denote a relation between the direct and indirect object, implying a transfer of possession, and cannot occur without a direct object. [3] Diagnostics to distinguish high and low applicatives include transitivity restrictions, verb semantics, depictive secondary predicates, and VP preposing tests.

Uploaded by

Jhay Phee Llorente
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
71 views7 pages

Reference Processing 0

The document discusses high and low applicatives. [1] High applicatives relate an additional individual to the event described by the verb, like benefactive or malfactive relations. They introduce arguments with case. [2] Low applicatives denote a relation between the direct and indirect object, implying a transfer of possession, and cannot occur without a direct object. [3] Diagnostics to distinguish high and low applicatives include transitivity restrictions, verb semantics, depictive secondary predicates, and VP preposing tests.

Uploaded by

Jhay Phee Llorente
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 7

Applicatives

Introducing Arguments, Liina Pylkkänen, 2002 (MIT doctoral dissertation)

Spring 2003

HIGH AND LOW APPLICATIVES


What to do with non-core arguments?

BENEFACTIVE

Benefactive in Bantu -- appears to be an argument with Case: High applicative


(1) Chaga
a. N-a̋-˝-lyì-í-à
i m-kà k-élyá
FOC-1SG-PRES-eat-APPL-FV 1-wife 7-food
'He is eating food for his wife.'

b. N-a̋-i-zrìc-í-à mbùyà.
FOC-1SG-PRES-eat-APPL-FV 9-friend
'He is running for a friend’ (Bresnan and Moshi 1993: 49-50)

Benefactive in English --often appears to be an adjunct, no Case: absence of High applicative


(2) a. *He ran a friend.
b. *He ate his wife food.

(3) Hypothesis pursued: Syntactic structure building is the only mode of structure building in
natural language (p. 12).

(4) Non-core arguments are introduced by syntactic heads.

(5) Structure of high applicative

VoiceP

He
Voice
wife
ApplBEN VP

eat food

High Applicative: relates an individual (wife) to an event (VP): common meaning --


benefactive, malfactive
"wife stands in in a benefactive relation to the event of eating, but bears no relation to the
object of eating...’the food'.” (p. 18)

(6) High APPL "the high applicative head combines with the VP by Event Identification and
relates an additional individual to the event described by the verb" (p. 21):
λx.λe. APPL(e,x) (APPL BEN, APPL INSTR, APPL LOC, and so forth)

DIAGNOSTICS

(7) Diagnostic 1: transitivity restrictions


Only high applicative heads combine with unergatives. Low applicative heads denote a
relation betweeen the direct and indirect object; it cannot occur in a structure that lacks a direct
object.
In Bantu: I ran a friend.

(8) Diagnostic 2: verb semantics


Low applicatives don't occur with verbs that are completely static because they imply a
transfer of possession. High applicatives should have no such restriction.
*John held Mary the bag.

DOUBLE-OBJECT CONSTRUCTION

(9) John baked Mary cake.

(10) Mary comes in possession of cake.

(11) Low applicative

VoiceP

He
Voice
bake
him
APPL cake

(12) High applicative: "very much like the external argument introducing head: they simply add
another participant to the event described by the verb"

Low applicative: low applied arguments bear no semantic relation to the verb whatsoever:
they only bear a transfer of possession relation to the direct object" (p. 19) (Pesetsky's
(1995) "Possessor-Goal")

Depictive secondary predicate can't be predicated of an indirect object (Williams 1980)


(13) a. I gave Mary the meat raw.
b. *I gave Mary the meat hungry. (Baker 1997)

(14) Object depictive


a. John ate the meat raw.

Subject depictive
b. John wrote the letter drunk.

*Implicit external argument


c. *This letter was written drunk.

*DP inside PP
d. *I talked to Sue drunk.

*Indirect object
e. *John told Mary the news drunk.

Depictives: may combine with Voice and verb. But not with low applicative head.

depictives: <e<st>>, Voice', transitive verbs: same -- both have an event argument and an

unsaturated argument of type e. It cannot combine with low applicative head (<e<e,st>,<st>>>),

but should be fine with high applicatives.

JAPANESE ADVERSITY PASSIVE (some of the data taken from Kubo 1992)

(15) Direct passive


a. Taroo-ga Ziroo-o hihansita.
Taro-Nom Jiro-Acc criticized
‘Taro criticized Jiro.’

b. Ziroo-ga Taroo-ni / -niyotte hihans-are-ta.


Jiro-Nom Taro-by criticize-PASS-PAST
‘Jiro was criticized by Taro.’

(16) Adversity passive


a. gapless
Taroo-ga ame-ni /*-niyotte fur-are-ta.
Taro-Nom rain-Dat fall-PASS-PAST
‘Taro was rained on.’

b. Gapped
Taroo-ga doroboo-ni / -niyotte heya-o aras-are-ta.
Taro-Nom thief-Dat/by room-Acc destroy-PASS-PAST
‘Taro’s room got destroyed on him by the thief.’

(17) Two types of adversity passive: high (gapless) and low (gapped)

a. High applicative

Taro
VP ApplMAL = rare

rain fall

b. Low applicative

Hanakoi
thief
ApplP V

ti Appl

room Appl

(18) -ni/-niyotte (-niyotte is only with gapped passive

Animacy

(19) a. gapless: must be animate

* Iwa-ga ame-ni fur-are-ta.


rock-Nom rain-Dat fall-PASS-PAST
‘The rock was rained on.’

b. gapped: need not be animate


Sono daishuzyutu-ga (Yamada-isi-niyotte) sittoo-o kaisis-are-ta.
that big.operation-Nom (Dr. Yamada-by) performance-Acc begin-PASS
‘That big operation had Dr. yamada start its performance.’

(20) But Bresnan (1978), etc.


John sent the boarder/*the border a package.

High and Low Applicatives: VP Preposing (Hoji, Miyagawa, and Tada 198?), Kubo (1992)

(21) a. Taroo-ga sushi-o tabeta.


Taro-Nom sushi-Acc ate
‘Taro ate sushi.’

b. [VP sushi-o tabe]-sae Tagroo-ga ___ sita.


[VP sushi-Acc ate ]-even Taro-Nom ___ did
‘Even eat sushi, Taro did.’

c.* [VP tabe]-sae Taroo-ga sushi-o sita. (cannot strand the object of V)
[VP ate ]-even Taro-Nom sushi-Acc did
‘Even eat sushi, Taro did.’

(22) gapped: shows that the verb and rare cannot be split: Low applicative
a. Taroo-ga doroboo-ni heya-o aras-are-ta.
Taro-Nom thief-by room-Acc destroy-PASS-PAST
‘Taro had the thief destroy his room.’

b. [VP doroboo-ni heya-o aras-are]-sae Taroo-ga ____ sita.


[VP thief-by room-Acc destroy-PASS]-evenTaro-Nom ___ did
‘Even have his room be destroyed by the thief, Taro did.’

c. * [VP doroboo-ni heya-o arasi]-sae Taroo-ga ____ s-are-ta.


[VP thief-by room-Acc destroy]-even Taro-Nom ___ do-PASS-PAST
‘Even have his room destroy] Taroo certainly was done.’

(23) gapless
a. Taroo-ga Hanako-ni koukou-o yame-rare-ta.
Taro-Nom Hanako-Dat high.school-Acc drop.out-PASS-PAST
‘Taro got Hanako dropping out of high school.’

b. [VP Hanako-ni koukou-o yame-rare]-sae Taroo-ga ____ sita.


[VP Hanako-Dat high.school-Acc drop.out-PASS]-even Taro-Nom ____ did
‘Even have Hanako drop out of high school, Taro did.

c. [VP Hanako-ni koukou-o yame]-sae Taroo-ga ____ s-are-ta.


[VP Hanako-Dat high.school-Acc drop.out]-even Taro-Nom ____ do-PASS
‘Even Hanako drop out of high school, Taro did have.’

Meaning of malfactive -- always retained in gapless passive


(24) a. gapped passive: neutral, and can vary with context
Hanako-ga suugaku-no-sensei-ni sikar-/homer- are-ta.
Hanako-Nom math-Gen-teacher-by scold/praise - PASS
‘Hanako was scolded/praised by the math teacher.’

b. gapless: always malfactive


Nagasaki-sityoo-ga bakudan/hoosyoozyoo-o okur-are-ta.
Nagasaki-mayor-Nom bomb/testimonial-Acc send-PASS-PAST
‘The mayor of Nagasaki was sent a bomb/testimonial.’

Transitivity restriction
(25) a. gapped: restricted to verbs with an object because it involves a low applicative
* Tiimu-ga koochi-ni nak-are-ta.
team-Nom coach-by cry-PASS
‘The team was cried on by its coach.’

b. gapped: no transitivity restriction -- high applicative


Taroo-ga koochi-ni nak-are-ta.
Taro-Nom coach-Dat cry-PASS
‘Taro was cried on by the coach.’

GAPPED ADVERSITY PASSIVE: problem with Kubo’s analysis


(26) Tarooi thief-by [DP t i room] was-destroyed (Kubo 1992)

(27) Gakuseii -ga Tanaka-sensei-niyotte t i futa-ri ronbun-o hihans-are-ta.


studentsi -Nom Prof. Tanaka-by t i 2-CL article-Acc criticize-PASS
‘Two students’s articles were criticized by Prof. Tanaka.’

Hebrew possessor dative

(28) ha-yalda kilkela le-Dan et ha-radio.


the-girl spoiled to-Dan Acc the-radio
‘The girl broke Dan’s radio on him.’

(29) VoiceP

the girl
Voice
spoil
to-Dan
Appl the radio

Transitivity restriction

(30) a. unaccusative
ha-kelev ne’elam le-Rina.
the-dog disappeared to-Rina
‘Rina’s dog disappeared.’
b. *unergative
*ha-kelev hitrocec le-Rina
the-dog ran-around to-Rina
‘Rina’s dog ran around on her.’

You might also like