MAThesis Barouni Final

8/13/2019 MAThesis Barouni Final

1/98

Spray- load verbs in Greek:

A comparison to Double Object verbs

MA Thesis

By Maria Barouni

Supervisor: Eric Reuland

Universiteit Utrecht


2/98

March 200

Ackno!led"ments

This part summarizes a trip that has finally reached his destination beginning from

Athens then going to Rethymno in !rete from there to Utrecht ne"t to Boston and

lastly bac# to $reece and for this reason there are many people % &ould li#e to than#'

To begin &ith Athens % &ant to than# my professors (opi )ourli and Anna Tsoutsani

&hose ideas influenced me and #no&ledge helped me a great deal throughout my studies*

My progress and my &ay of thin#ing probably &ould have been very different if % had

not had the luc# to have them as my professors*

!rete has been one of the best periods of my life so far and this is due to many people* To

begin &ith % &ant to than# t&o families Stefana#i and +ereda#i and especially my aunts

(opi and %oanna* Than#s for having your doors al&ays open for me and for all your love

and affection these four years*

Rethymno &ould not have had any of that s&eetness if % didn,t have t&o special friends

-alia .aroda#i and $iota Triadi* %t is hard to thin# ho& my student life &ould be &ithout both of you and it is also hard to fit everything in /ust one paragraph* These years that

&ere full of 0endless1 discussions laughter dancing 0and drin#ing***1 dreaming and

0falling in1 love'have been accompanying me since then* Than#s for the nice memories

that % am carrying from the years that &e spent and &e are still spending together and

for all your patience to have been handling &ith me &hen &e &ere close 0!rete'1 and

far 0Utrecht Boston1'2

My life probably &ould have ta#en a different course if there &as not one person playing

an important role in my life my professor Elena Anagnostopoulou* Elena than#s for so

many things: for all your inspiration for your advices 0you could foresee at least 3 years

ahead from and for me'1 all the #no&ledge and the help that you have provided me

3


3/98

&ith these last four years* Elena belongs to these persons that % feel % &ill never be able to

than# for all the things she has done and does for me*

At last but not least % &ant to than# the rest of my professors at the 4inguistic department

in !rete for the #no&ledge &hich they have provided me &ith as &ell as people &ith

&hom % have special moments to remember from Rethymno prior and after it: my

cousins Ar/iro Tzana#a#i 4ina Stefana#i )rini and Tonia Barouni and of course

Mariana Efthimiou for being for all these years such a special friend'

Utrecht &as a big change for me very crucial and influential and there are several people

that % &ant to than#* Starting &ith my supervisor Eric Reuland5 Eric than#s for helping

me conducting this M(hil program in my o&n &ay for the tutorials of the 6st year for

ta#ing care of every issue that % have been bothering you &ith for your support and thetrust you sho&ed me throughout these 3 years and a half* % am carrying lots of nice

memories from our &or# in Utrecht*

My friend %van Teomiro $arcia finally it is my turn to than# you'Many than#s for the

time &e spent together discussing arguing going out for encouraging me and helping

me &ith my decisions for being the best friend % could have possibly as#ed for* 7ithout

you this master &ould have lasted much less*

8ot to forget to than# my $rote roommates 4ola Alice 9anna as &ell as all the rest of

my 6 roommates &ith &hom % have lots of memories from our 3nd floor #itchen; dinners

travels and multi cultural parties* % hope &e meet soon again some&here in Europe* At

last but not least than#s to Evi -lachou for her advices as &ell as for pic#ing up my

furniture around Utrecht the year that % &as a&ay**2

$oing to Boston % had the luc# to be embraced by t&o families* Special than#s to Mrs

Efi (apadopoulos for helping me on my going to Boston and for the hospitality of hers

and of her family* Than#s also to my landlord


4/98

Though % &as in a different continent % felt at home in the States and this is due to a

person &ho lives in 8e& >or# &as al&ays by my side and has al&ays been since then

my uncle $eorge Barounis* .is name is enough to describe his role during my stay* ?@

% can,t than# you for all the things that you did for me: for your big heart your endless

and uni ue stories our trips'* % have so many nice memories from 8e& >or# that

cannot fit in these short lines* % am &aiting for you in $reece'

The second year of my Master program % had the lac# to spend it at M%T in Boston* This

year though not an easy one &as the fulfillment of one of my biggest dreams that started

even before my studying 4inguistics* 8oam !homs#y &as a crucial influence and the

main reason for my visit to Boston and % than# him for all his influence on my thin#ing5

after my staying ho&ever % have every reason to than# many other people as &ell* To begin &ith % &ould li#e to than# +avid (esets#y for my giving this chance to visit M%T

and &hose lectures % had the luc# to follo& and benefit from5 Sabine %atridou for all our

meetings her time the very helpful as &ell as sharp comments that she provided me

&ith5 Alec Marantz for his hospitality 0being the .ead of the +epartment1 and his

inspiring lectures'5 Shigeru Miyaga&a for his #indness throughout the year* Above all

% &ould li#e to than# 8orvin Richards for supervising me during the spring semester for

his comments advices time for being al&ays so friendly and helpful*

Many than#s also go to the students &ith &hom % spent this year: !hristina Sevdali for

our nice moments in !ambridge during the fall semester'and to the (h+ students at

M%T &ith &hom % follo&ed classes discussed and partied* Aly than#s for ma#ing me

your officemate during the spring semester and for our coffees and discussions*Yes Raj

Roni for the beerder dinners*

% have left aside t&o persons that need to be than#ed separately* Ra/ Singh &as a great

roommate the &hole year and even a greater person to have in my life* .ello than#s for

everything' %f it had not been you my visit &ould have lost much of its taste and &ould

have lasted much less* Beerder dinners 6= C coffees Ber#shire discussions'4ots of

memories that can,t be listed as &ell as your friendship that you offered to me so #indly*

D


5/98

%t suffices to say that % am really missing Ber#shire and % am really sorry that you are not

part of my every day life anymore'

Mohi Sillah came during the last phase of my stay something bet&een T( and !( and

&hether this is a phase or not % had to stop there* Mohi than#s for ma#ing so s&eet and

uni ue the time &e spent together* % &ish time and distance could change*

At the end % have left to than# persons that have played a ma/or and special role in my

life my family*

My %talianF cousin Manolis Stefana#is has al&ays been there for me from !rete to

Utrecht and then to Boston understanding me better than anyone sharing my problems

encouraging me being a person % could al&ays count on* Manoli really than#s for allyour calls for listening to me for advising me for ma#ing me laugh in difficult periods

for all'

!oming to my sister (anagiota and my brother Radamanthis little can be said in /ust a

paragraph* Tota is a uni ue person and being my sister % have had the luc# to receive her

constant love support and critical advices'*Tota mu really than#s for your care and

patience all this time'A#is is an especially crazy and inspiring person &ith &hom 0&hen

&e don,t disagree21 % have the best things to remember* A#is go on surprising us being so

special but please do not forget also to call me2 % have missed you both a lot all this

time'

)inally % &ould li#e to than# my parents and for all the things &hich

they have provided me &ith* Than# you both for your endless affection your trust your

calls your psychological and financial support* Mama than#s for your constant love and

your non stop parcels to Utrecht and Boston5 Baba than#s for your trust and your endless

love* 7ords prove insufficient to e"press my feelings for all the things that you have

been doing for me* This thesis could not be dedicated to anyone else but you*

% feel luc#y for having met and for having all of you in my life*


6/98

22 nd o# March 200 $ %aris


7/98

Contents:

Chapter 1:

6*6Introduction ''''''''''''''''''''''''** G

6*3 Spray;load verbs and the locative alternation ''''''''''''** 66

6*= The 4ocative alternation in $ree# and its different frames '''''''* 6=

6*D (repositional )rames of spray;loadF verbs in $ree# '''''''''* 6D

6* 8on;prepositional frames of spray;loadF verbs in $ree# '''''''** 6

6* 7hich verbs appear in &hich framesH ''''''''''''''***** 6

6*I +ouble 9b/ect verbs in $ree# and English '''''''''''''** 6C

Chapter 2:

!omparing $ree# spray;loadF verbs to the English ones'''''''''* 36

Chapter 3:

The PPto frame

=*6 !omparing the ((to frame of the +ouble 9b/ect and spray; loadF verbs '* 3

=*3 Anagnostopoulou,s 03JJ=b1 analysis '''''''''''''''' 3C

Chapter 4:The PPwith Frame

D*6 Bruening,s theory 03JJ61 '''''''''''''''''''' =6

D*3 !omparing the ((&ith frame of spray; loadF to the $en; Acc frame of the

+ouble 9b/ect group in $ree#''''''''''''''''''* =I

D*= Evaluating Bruening,s 03JJ61 theory '''''''''''''''** DJ

D*D 4echner,s theory 06CC 1''''''''''''''''''''' D=

Chapter 5:

Non PP frames

*6 An introduction to the +* Acc of the +ouble 9b/ect verbs'''''''' DC

*3 !omparing the +* Acc of the Spray;loadF and the +ouble 9b/ect verbs''* 3

*= The partitive analysis '*''**''''''''''''''''''** J

I


8/98

*D Kipars#y,s 06CCG1 analysis '''''''''''''''''''** 6

* Applying Kipars#y,s theory in $ree# '''''''''''''''* 3

Chapter 6:

*6 9pen %ssues '''''''''''''''''''''''''** G

*3 Summary ''''''''''''''''''''''''''** IJ

Abbreviations ''''''''''''''''''''''''''* I3

Appendi" % '''''''''''''''''''''''''''** I=

Appendi" %% '''''''''''''''''''''''''''* IC

Appendi" %%% ''''''''''''''''''''''''''' G=

Appendi" %-'''''''''''''''''''''''''''* GReferences '''''''''''''''''''''''''''*** C6

G


9/98

Chapter 1

Spra !"oad #er$s

1%1 IntroductionThe current thesis presents and analyzes the syntactic properties of spray;loadF verbs in

$ree#* My goal is to attempt to provide an analysis for this group of verbs as there has

not been any previous systematic &or# on them in $ree# and thus to contribute to our

understanding of these verbs in general*

Spray;loadF verbs play an important role in the current research that e"plores the

relation bet&een le"ical and syntactic structure* The fact that this group is able to appearin alternative syntactic environments raises intriguing uestions about the nature of the

relation bet&een the t&o alternations 0see sections 6*3 and 6*3*6 for the t&o issues

respectively1* Since the same issue arises also &ith the +ouble 9b/ect 0prepositional

ditransitive1 group of verbs 0section 6*I1 there has been a uestion still &ithout a

conclusive ans&er about &hether the spray;loadF and the +ouble 9b/ect group should

form a single and uni ue group or rather should be treated separately* %n the current thesis

L % am particularly grateful to E* Anagnostopoulou E* Reuland and 8* Richards for our discussionstheir advices comments and the time they devoted to me* % &ould also li#e to than# all the professors

&ith &hom % have discussed several issues of this thesis5 from M%T S* %atridou A* Marantz and S*

Miyaga&a and from the 4SA 3JJ summer school A* Ale"iadou .* Borer .* .arley and B* 4evin*

Than#s also go to A* Bechrach and R* Singh for discussions on my my thesis on the Ith and Gth floor at

Stata !enter* )inally than#s to Mari/ana Marel/ Manolis and 8atalia .atiris for reading a draft of my

thesis* Though % have not adopted all of their proposals % benefited from the discussions &ith the

above persons and % am really grateful for this*

% &ould also li#e to than# the people &ho helped me &ith the data: E* Anagnostopoulou !leo

!ondoravdi Anastasia $ianna#idou !hristina Sevdali 8ina Topintzi and Evi -lachou and my

informants -alia !haroda#i Manolis Stefana#is and $iota Triadi***Many than#s to all the above

people*

C


10/98

% &ill shed light on this uestion by comparing the $ree# spray;loadF verbs &ith the

$ree# +ouble 9b/ect verbs*

% &ill begin by presenting the basic properties of the English spray;loadF group and the

frames that these verbs appear in 06*315 then % &ill introduce the $ree# spray;loadF

group 06*=1 and its frames the prepositional 06*D1 and the non;prepositional ones that are

also available &ith this group on $ree# 06* 1* The group of spray;loadF groups &ill be

separated into subcategories depending on the sort and the number of frames they appear

in 06* 1* .aving presented spray;loadF verbs in both $ree# and English the ne"t move

&ill be to present +ouble 9b/ect 0+*91 verbs 06*I1 &ith &hich term % &ill henceforth

refer to the (repositional +itransitive verbs and the frames in &hich these verbs are

encountered in both English and $ree# pointing out again the differences and thesimilarities bet&een the t&o languages*

%n the second chapter a comparison bet&een the $ree# and English spray;loadF verbs

&ill be accomplished* The prepositional configurations that are common bet&een the t&o

languages &ill prove to be much ali#e according to the syntactic tests that &ill be applied

&ith the crucial difference that scrambling is available in $ree# changing scope and

binding relations*

The third chapter deals &ith the ((to configuration that is available in both the spray;

loadF and the +ouble 9b/ect verbs 0Anagnostopoulou 3JJ=b1* The ans&er to the uestion

&hether this construction behaves syntactically the same in the t&o groups of verbs is

positive based on a series of tests that are applied5 Anagnostopoulou,s 03JJ=b1 proposal

about the syntactic representation of the ((to configuration of the +*9 is thus adopted

for the respective frame of the spray;loadF group*

!hapter four accomplishes a comparison bet&een the ((&ith configuration of the spray;

loadF verbs and the $en;A!! frame of the +* 9 group* %t begins by presenting

Bruening,s 03JJ61 theory that correlates the English ((&ith configuration of the spray;

loadF verbs to the one of the +* 9 group 0D*61 and then presents the results from the

6J


11/98

respective comparison in $ree# 0D*31* After evaluating Bruening,s theory 0D*=1 an

alternative theory is presented that of 4echner 06CC 1 in &hich it &ill be argued ho&

ambiguity can be accounted for 0D*D1* (roblems arising &ith either theory force us to

leave the issue of the syntactic representation of the ((&ith configuration of the spray;

loadF verbs open*

.aving analyzed the prepositional frames % &ill move to present the non;prepositional

frames that are also available in $ree# 0 *61 and compare them 0 *31: the +* Acc of the

spray;loadF verbs to the +* Acc of a subcategory of the +ouble 9b/ect verbs the

teachF class 0Anagnostopoulou 3JJ61* 7hat is concluded is that the t&o configurations

do not behave the same syntactically* The properties of the Theme in the +* Acc of the

spray;loadF verbs remind us of the ones of partitiveF case according to the tests appliedin 0 *=1 0vs* the +* Acc of teachF class1 suggesting that an analysis along the lines of

Kipars#y 06CCG1 can be adopted 0 *D1*

The last chapter 0 1 raises some of the issues that are left unans&ered 0 *61 and

summarizes the conclusions that have been dra&n in the previous sections 0 *31*

66


12/98

1%2 Spra ! "oad #er$s and the "ocati#e a"ternation

To begin &ith the spray;loadF group6 contains verbs that denote an action of transferring

substances material from a surface container to another one either by putting it or by

removing it 0see 4evin 6CC=1*

The most important property of these verbs of this group of verbs is the fact that they

participate in the so;called locativeF alternation as given in 061 0see the footnote belo&

for an overvie& of the approaches that have been proposed the last forty years31

06a1 A#is loaded bo"es into the car

06b1 A#is loaded the car &ith bo"es

Apart from spray;loadF verbs there are also other groups of verbs that participate in

syntactic alternations such as the clearF and the &ipeF alternation 0in 3 and =

respectively1 04evin 6CC=1:

6 A list of the verbs that belong to the spray;loadF group is given in 4evin 06CC=1: brush cramcro&d cultivate dab daub drape drizzle dust hang heap in/ect /am load mound pac# pile plant

plaster Hpric# pump rub scatter seed settle se& sho&er slather smear smudge so& spatter

splash splatter spray spread sprin#le spritz s uirt stac# stic# stoc# stre& string stuff s&ab H

vest H&ash &rap*

3 A non e"haustive list of people &ho have contributed to understand these verbs is the follo&ing 0asgiven in Bruening 3JJ61:

Ac#erman 06CC31 Anderson 06CI61 Ba#er 06CCI1 Boons 06CID1 Brin#mann 06CCI1 !roft 06CCG1

+emonte 06CC61 +o&ty 06CC61 Emonds 06CC61 )illmore 06C G1 )raser 06CI61 )u#ui et al 06CG 1$oldberg 06CC 1 $ropen et al 06CC61 .all 06C 1 .oe#stra et Mulder 06CCJ1


13/98

03a1 Mohi cleared the papers from the des#

03b1 Mohi cleared the des# from the papers

0=a1 -alia &iped the fingerprints off the screen of the laptop

0=b1 -alia &iped the screen of the laptop 0Oof the fingerprints1

The latter t&o alternations differ from the spray;loadF alternation &ith respect to the

type of the preposition introducing the (( 0compare 6b to 3b and =b15 to begin &ith the

spray;loadF alternation the Theme is a bare +( and the $oal is usually introduced &ith

the (( toF =06a1 &hereas the $oal is a bare +( and the Theme is al&ays introduced &ith

the (( &ithF in its alternative frame* 9n the other hand the preposition remains the

same 0 fromF1 in either frame of the clearF alternation 03a;3b1* )inally regarding the&ipeF alternation the Theme can be realized as a bare +( and the $oal location is

introduced by the preposition offF 0=a15 alternatively the $oal location is the only

complement that is realized and it is a bare +( 0=b1* %n this thesis % &ill focus on the

spray;loadF group 061*

&'2'& (!o main lines o# approach #or the )spray-load* verbs

$enerally spea#ing there are t&o main lines of approach &ith respect to spray;loadF

verbs* 9ne prevailing vie& based on the Scope facts of the ((&ith configuration 0see

chapter 3 and section D*6 on this1 is that the theme introduced &ith the preposition &ithF

in the respective configuration is also a complement 04arson 6CGG Bruening 3JJ61* A

different approach that could be pursued is that the Theme in this configuration may be

an ad/unct 0p*c* 4evin in progress1* %f the latter proves to be the case then this &ould

entail that the t&o configurations that are available &ith these verbs in English differ &ith

each other a great deal and of course any correlation &ith the +* 9 group is spurious*

= As noted by Bruening 03JJ61 in his fn*D prepositions that can appear instead of toF are the

follo&ing: over in 0to1 in and onF* The reason &hy the type of preposition of this frame varies in

English but not in $ree# is attributed to the difference bet&een these t&o languages &ith respect to the

feature +irection (ath and the related function of resultativity 0for more on this see Anagnostopoulou

03JJ=a1*

6=


14/98

1%3 The &ocati#e a"ternation in 'ree( and its different frames

7e have seen above 06*31 that there are t&o available configurations for spray;loadF

verbs in English* The frame in 06a1 &ill be referred to as the ((toF frame and its variant

in 06b1 as the ((&ithF frame* 4et us no& turn to see ho& this alternation manifests itself

to the $ree# spray;loadF group of verbs*

Before presenting the frames &hich $ree# spray;loadF verbs pro/ect the respective

spray;loadF group is given belo&* A list of spray;loadF verbs in $ree# includes the

follo&ingD:

Adlo (=pump), alifo (= smear) $ bou o!o (= s"uff), efodia#o (= s"o$ ) e%a"&is"ame(=se""le), e "o se'o (=s uir"), epalifo (= dab), fi"e'o (= pla!"), for"o!o (= load), &o!o (=

$ram, s"i$ ), jemi#o (= fill) * $ isajo (= i!je$"), alip"o (= drape, plas"er), edo (=pri$ ),

remo (= &a!%), ses o!i#o (=dus"), mou"#ouro!o (= smud%e), pasalifo (= daub),

(peri)"ilijo (= +rap), peri'alo (= 'es"), pi"sili#o (= splas&), ple!ome lou#ome (= +as&),

pse a#o (spra-), radi#o (= spra-), ra'o (= se+), sfi!o!o s"rimo&!o (=jam), sfou%ari#o

(= s+ab), si!a"&ri#ome (= $ro+d), s epa#o (= plas"er), s orpi#o (= spread s"re+

s$a""er), sper!o (= so+), s"i'a#o (= pa$ , s"a$ , pile, &eap), "ri'o (= rub), "robaro

(=pump) $ "sibo (= pri$ ), 'ja#o 'las"a!o= sprou"), 'our"si#o (= brus&).

D See though in section 6* &hich verbs are finally included in the $ree# spray;loadF group*

The verb fillF does not belong to the group of spray;loadF verbs in Englsih 0see fn*61 but it does soin $ree# and for this reason it is listed here*

6D


15/98

1%4 Prepositiona" frames of )spra !"oad* #er$s in 'ree(

&'+'& (he %%to #rame

The ((toF frame is also available &ith $ree# spray;loadF verbs 0D1:

0D1 P Q#is fortose #utia sto ama#si

The A#is loaded bo"es;A!! to;the car;A!!

A#is loaded bo"es into the carF

%n this frame the themeF is a +( bearing accusative case and the locationF is

e"pressed as a +( introduced by the preposition toF 0 se1: se ton 0definite article1

s, ton ston* +ue to the fact that $ree# mar#s morphologically case and gender in thearticles the ((to may appear in the follo&ing forms as given in table %*

Ta$"e I

A$$usa"i'e/s% A$$usa"i'e/pl

0as$uli!e Ston stus

1emi!i!e Stin stis

2eu"ral Sto sta

&'+'2 (he %%!ith #rame

The ((&ith frame is also available in $ree# as can be seen in 0 1:

0 1 P A#is fortose to ama#si me #utia

The A#is loaded the car;A!! &ith bo"es

A#is loaded the car &ith bo"esF

Similarly to English the Theme is introduced &ith the preposition meF 0 &ith1 and the

location;$oal is a bare +( bearing accusative case*

6


16/98

1%5 Non!prepositiona" frames of )spra !"oad* #er$s in 'ree(

%nterestingly $ree# differs from English in that spray;loadF verbs also appear in frames

that do not include a ((5 the t&o complements are bare +(s*

&','& (he Double Accusative #rame D' Acc.

As the name of this configuration reveals both complements in this configuration are

+(s carrying accusative case in the +ouble AccusativeF construction*

0 1 9 A#is fortose to ama#si #utia

The A#is loaded the car;A!! bo"es;A!!

A#is loaded the car &ith bo"esF

&','2 (he Genitive-Accusative #rame Gen-Acc.

A fe& verbs can also appear in the $en; Acc configuration 0category 0a1 section 6* 1* %n

this frame the $oal bears genitive and the Theme accusative case* %t must be noted on

one hand that a necessary condition for this frame is that the $oal has to be animate

0compare Ia to Ib1 and on the other hand that the use of this configuration is very

limited and its acceptability depends on the idiolect of the spea#er* %n most of the cases

the $en; Acc frame tends to receive an idiomatic interpretation*

0Ia1 9 A#is fortose tis Marias ta vivlia ta vivlia tis Marias

The A#is loaded the Mary;$E8 the boo#s;A!! the boo#s;A!! the

Mary;$E8

H A#is loaded Mary &ith boo#sF

0Ib1 O9 A#is fortose tu ama#siu ta vivlia ta vivlia tu ama#siu

The A#is loaded the car;$E8 the boo#s;A!! the boo#s;A!! the car;

$E8

A#is loaded the car &ith boo#sF

See also Appendi" %- for some of the properties of this configuration*

6


17/98

1%6 +hich #er$s appear in which frames,

Even though the $ree# verbs that correspond to the English ones have been listed as a

simple group 0section 6*31 these verbs vary remar#ably &ith respect to the number of

alternations they license* The $ree# spray;loadF verbs can be grouped in the follo&ing

seven categories depending on the sort of frames they appear in:

0a1 -erbs for &hich the ((&ith ((to the +ouble Accusative and the $en;

Acc is available* These verbs are:

fortono 0 load1 pse#azo 0spray1 0ep1alifo 0 smear1 and pitsilizo

0 splash1*

0b1 -erbs for &hich the ((&ith ((to and the +ouble Accusative is available*The verbs sperno 0 so&1 efodiazo 0 stoc#1 fitevo 0 plant1 and radizo 0

spray1 belong in this sub group*

0c1 -erbs for &hich the ((&ith and the +ouble Accusative is available such

as: pasalifo 0 daub1 bou#ono 0 stuff1 , perivalo 0 vest1 gemizo 0 fill1*

%n this group also belong the verbs #alipto 0 drape1 s#epazo 0 plaster1

and 0peri1 tili/o 0 &rap1 but note that they license the +* Acc &ith theTheme al&ays in pluralI*

0d1 -erbs for &hich the ((to and the $en; A!! is available5 these verbs are:

Kremo 0 hang1 hono 0 cram stic#1 isa/o 0 in/ect1 e#to#sevo 0 s uirt1

stivazo 0 pac# stac# pile heap1 sfinono ; strimohno 0 /am1

I The fact that these verbs re uire A!!theme in plural is possibly because these verbs are tended to beinterpreted as full of'F and the complement 0theme1 follo&ing in plural defines &hat these verbs

are filled &ith*

6I


18/98

0e1 -erbs for &hich the ((to configuration is only available:

Egathistame 0 settle1 sinathrizome 0 cro&d1 s#orpizo 0 spread stre&

scatter1

0f1 %n this group belong verbs that appear only in the ((&ith frame*

7hat is interesting &ith these verbs is the fact that it is not clear &hat the

role of the (( is 0contrary to English1* %n some cases the (( is interpreted

as instrumentF 0e"* tsibo 0 pric#1 vourtsizo 0 brush1 moutzourono 0

smudge1 &hereas in others as materialF 0e"* #edo 0 pric#1 sfougarizo

0 s&ab1 plenome louzome 0 &ash1 ravo 0 se&1 moutzourono 0

smudge1G* 9ne &ould have to e"plore these verbs separately so as to

understand further and deeper their properties*

0g1 %ncluded in this last category are verbs that either do not participate in any

alternation ;they appear only in one frame; or that the sort of alternation

they appear in differs 0they form the respective clearF alternation in

$ree#5 see 031 above1*

The verb adlo 0 pump1F 0G1 belongs to the first group as it can only

appear in the configuration in &hich the Theme bears accusative case and

the $oal location is introduced &ith the (( apoF 0 from1* The verbs

trivo 0 rub1 and #ses#onizo 0 dust1F belong in the latter group; they

participate in the clearF alternation 0C1*

0G1 9 $ianis adlise nero apo to pigadi

The $ianis pumped &ater;A!! from the &ell


19/98

The Maria dusted the shelf;A!! from the spiders

Maria dusted the shelf from the spidersF

0Cb1 % Maria #ses#onise tis arahnes apo to rafi

The Maria dusted the spiders;A!! from the shelf Maria dusted the spiders from the shelfF

)rom the above classification of the respective spray;loadF verbs in $ree# it can be

concluded that the number of verbs that participates in the locative alternation is much

more restricted in $ree# than its correlate in English* More precisely the categories 0a1

0b1 and 0c1 participate in the so;called spray;loadF locative alternation and on these % &ill

focus in the present thesis*

9n the other hand the category 0d1 should be included in the group of verbs that appears

in the +ouble 9b/ect construction and should be analyzed accordingly 0for more see

Anagnostopoulou 3JJ61 &hereas the subclasses 0e1 and 0f1 should be the ob/ect of further

research in order to be properly understood* )inally the verbs of the 0f1 category should

be also e"plored separately and in relation to the respective English ones that participate

in the clearF alternation*

6C


20/98

1%- .ou$"e /$0ect #er$s in 'ree( and n "ish

Since in the present thesis % am going to accomplish a comparison bet&een the spray;

loadF and the +ouble 9b/ect group let me also briefly present the second group in

uestion the +ouble 9b/ect one* This group participates in the follo&ing alternation: the

goal 0goal beneficiary or possessor1 may alternate surfacing either as a (( 06Ja1 or a +(

06Jb1* The former is &ell #no&n as the to dativeF &hereas the latter as the +ouble

ob/ect structure*

06Ja1


21/98

066c1 9 $ianis dida#se ta pedia mathimati#a 4ouble A$$usa"i'e frame

The $ianis taught the children;A!! mathematics;A!!


22/98


23/98

06=b1 P Manolis fortose ena 0Vd/aforeti#o1 ama#si me 0to1 #athe #uti

The Manolis loaded a 0Vdifferent1 car;A!! &ith 0the1 every bo"

Manolis loaded a 0Vdifferent1 car &ith every bo"Fa : e'er-, ;e'er- : a

8ote that &hen ambiguity arises 063a and 6=a for English and $ree# respectively1 the

surface scope reading is not the preferred one due to pragmatic reasons* %n order for the

same bo" to be loaded on every truc# either &e have to imagine a possible &orld in

&hich a huge bo" is able to load all truc#s or that the event ta#es place in different times

and the same bo" is loaded on all truc#s* 7hat is important is that despite the pragmatic

effects that render this interpretation bizarre this is still possible66 &hile this is not the

case by all means in the ((&ith configuration*

At this point it is crucial to test &hat happens &hen scrambling occurs &hich is possible

in $ree# and if scope facts change* As seen in 06=c1 ambiguity arises once the theme is

moved above the $oal 4ocation:

06=c1 9 Manolis fortose me ena 0d/aforeti#o1 #uti 0to1 #athe ama#si 031

The Manolis loaded &ith a 0different1 bo" the every car;A!!

Manolis loaded every car &ith a 0different1 bo"F

8ote that the respective structure in English is ungrammatical as English does not license

scrambling:

06=d1 OManolis loaded &ith a 0different1 bo" every car

66 )or $ianna#idou and Anagnostopoulou 0p*c1 the surface reading is unavailable or at least difficultto be elicited unless it is assumed that the same load is loaded in each truc# at a different time5 this

ho&ever &ould re uire introducing temporal operators &hich &ould result in a different

uantification* .o&ever % thin# that the same problem arises also &ith the ambiguity arising in the

English ((to configuration*

3=


24/98

2'2 /uanti#ier 1ariable indin" /1 .

Bound variables are a very helpful test to chec# the scope of the uantifier since the latter

can only bind elements &ithin its scope 0.igginbotham 6CGJ May 6CG 1* %f this is the

case the uantifier that ta#es scope must be able to bind also a variable appearing &ithin

the constituent containing the other uantifier* Bruening 03JJ61 applying this test to

English spray;loadF verbs notes that variable binding is possible in the ((to

configuration 06Da1 but not in its variant 06Db1*

06Da1 Maud draped a sheet that matched itsi color over every armchair ia : e'er-, e'er- : a

06Db1 OMaud draped an armchair that matched itsi color &ith every sheetia : e'er-, ;e'er- : a

The same is the case also for $ree# since -B is possible in the ((to frame 06 a1 0as

&ell as the e"ample 0 b1 of the Appendi" %1 but not in the ((&ith one 06 b1*

06 a1 H o# 9 Ra/ fortose to fortio tui sto #athe container iThe Ra/ loaded the load;A!! !litic;$E8 i to;the every container;A!! iRa/ loaded its load into every containerF

06 b1 O9 Ra/ fortose to container tui me to #athe fortioiThe Ra/ loaded the container !litic;$E8i &ith the every loadiORa/ loaded its container &ith every loadF

4et us no& turn to chec# &hether scrambling changes binding facts in the ((&ith

configuration as it happened above in the case of R 06=c1* As can be seen in 06 c1 oncescrambling has ta#en place binding is possible also in the ((&ith configuration*

06 c1 9 Ra/ fortose me to fortio tui to #athe container iThe Ra/ loaded &ith the load !litic;$E8 i the every container;A!! i

3D


25/98

ORa/ loaded &ith its load every containerF

2'3 4ach versus every

Bruening 03JJ61 follo&ing May 06CG 6CGG1 &ho distinguishes eachF from everyF on

the basis that eachF can ta#e scope over a uantifier in cases that everyF cannot 06 a vs*

6 b1 tests &hether the type of the uantifier results to the frozenF scope of the English

((&ith frame* Bruening argues that )rozen scope is not due to the type of the uantifier

since even in cases that the Theme is introduced &ith the uantifier eachF the latter is

unable to raise over the $oal and for this reason the pair;list reading is not available

either 06Ia vs* 6Ib1*

06 a1 7hich friend brought every presentH

;3air/lis" readi!%

06 b1 7hich friend brought each presentH 3air/lis" readi!%

06Ia1 7hich sheet did he drape" over each armchairH 3air/lis" readi!%

06Ib1 7hich armchair did he drape" &ith each sheetH

O 3air/lis" readi!%

8ote that $ree# does not have t&o different le"emes corresponding to eachF and

everyF5 instead the &ord #atheF is used in either case* .o&ever &hen the definite

article is added to the argument introduced &ith the &ord #atheF 0 every1 the

distributive reading becomes more easily available 06Ga1* %n an informal test that % have

conducted most native spea#ers preferred the variant &ith the definite article5 some even

automatically added the definite article by themselves in order for them the sentence to be

grammatically correct in some cases being una&are of the present remar# about theeffect of the presence or not of the definite article* %n other &ords there is a tendency to

consider the meaning of the structure +ef* article every +(F as the respective one of

the &ord eachF but the acceptability of this generalization depends on the spea#er and

its idiolect* )or this reason this argument &ill not be used to test the unavailability of the

3


26/98

$oal in the ((&ith configuration to raise over the Theme even &hen the +ef* article

every +(F is used 06Gb1*

06Ga1 % (anagiota pse#ase ena 0d/aforeti#o1 bu#ali fitofarma#o sto #athe fito

The (anagiota;89M sprayed a 0different1 bottle;A!! pesticide to;the

every plant;A!!

(anagiota sprayed a 0different1 bottle of pesticide to each plantF

06Gb1 % (anagiota pse#ase ena 0Vd/aforeti#o1 fito meto #athe bu#ali fitofarma#o

The (anagiota;89M sprayed a 0Vdifferent1 plant;A!! &ith the every

bottle pesticide

(anagiota sprayed a 0Vdifferent1 plant &ith each bottle of pesticideF

2'+ Summary

Summing up the results from the tests of uantifier Raising and uantifier -ariable

Binding applied in both languages the follo&ing can be concluded:

$ree# behaves similarly to English &ith respect to the number of interpretations that are

available in the t&o (repositional configurations ((to and ((&ith* The former licenses

uantifier Raising and uantifier -ariable Binding &hereas the latter does not* .o&ever

due to the fact that scrambling is possible in $ree# &hen this ta#es place then the

inverse scope reading and binding is licensed also in the ((&ith configuration a fact

&hich distinguishes crucially $ree# from English*

My ne"t step &ill be to test the implications from the above results for the theory of

spray;loadF verbs in $ree#5 e"ploring the syntactic properties of each frame and

comparing it ne"t to the respective configuration of the +ouble 9b/ect verbs a syntactic

representation for each frame &ill be proposed*

3


27/98

Chapter 3

The PPto frame

3%1 Comparin the PPto frame of the .ou$"e /$0ect and )spra ! "oad*#er$s

The ((to configuration as &e have seen above 0section 6*I1 is a common configuration

bet&een the +ouble 9b/ect and spray;loadF verbs* A natural issue arising is &hether this

configuration behaves syntactically the same in these t&o groups and thus a common

syntactic representation should be adopted* Anagnostopoulou 03JJ=b1 has dealt &ith +*9

verbs and has proposed a syntactic analysis for this group5 the tas# over the follo&ing

pages of this section &ill be to compare the properties of the ((to frame of the spray;

loadF verbs &ith the ones of the ((to configuration of the +ouble 9b/ect verbs63*

7hat &ill be concluded from the tests applied belo& 06C;361 is that that this frame

behaves syntactically the same in the t&o groups of verbs and thus a common syntactic

representation can be adopted*

3'&'& /uanti#ier aisin"

Anagnostopoulou 03JJ=b1 does not provide us &ith the scope facts of the ditransitiveverbs so % &ill test if R is available in this group of verbs as % did also &ith spray;

loadF verbs 06=a1* )or both +ouble 9b/ect 06C1 and spray;loadF verbs in $ree#

0repeated from above 6=a1 inverse scope is available in the ((to configuration:

06=a1 % (anagiota estile ena 0d/aforeti#o1 doro se #athe pedi

% (anagiota sent a 0different1 gift;A!! to every child

63 % have chosen to provide the complete list of the syntactic tests that % applied in the Appendi" %trying to avoid being tiring* Belo& % only present t&o representative tests to my vie& uantifier

Raising 0 R1 0=*6*61 and the availability of the pair;list reading 0=*6*31. The tests of -B the

each'the otherF construction passivization and the freedom of the order of the complements that %

have applied in both groups can be found in the Appendi" %*

3I


28/98

(anagiota sent a 0different1 gift to every childFa : e'er-, e'er- : a

06C1 P Q#is fortose ena 0d/aforeti#o1 #uti se #athe ama#si

The A#is loaded a 0different1 bo";A!! to every car;A!!

A#is loaded a 0different1 bo" on every carFa : e'er-, e'er- : a

3'&'2 %air-list readin"

According to Bruening 03JJ=1 &hen -B is permitted 06Da and 6Db repeated from

above1 then the pair;list reading is also available 03Ja and 3Jb respectively1*

06Da1 Maud draped a sheet that matched itsi color over every armchair ia : e'er-, e'er- : a

06Db1 OMaud draped an armchair that matched itsi color &ith every sheetia : e'er-, ;e'er- : a

03Ja1 7hich sheet did he drape" over each armchairH

3air/lis" readi!%

03Jb1 7hich armchair did he drape" &ith each sheetH

O 3air/lis" readi!%

Applying the same test in $ree# &e see that the pair;list reading is available in the ((to

frame of both +ouble 9b/ect and spray;loadF verbs 036a and 36b respectively1*

036a1 (/o doroi estiles se #athe pedii H

7hich gift;A!! sent to every child

7hich gift did you send to every childHF

3air/lis" readi!%

3G


29/98

036b1 (/o bu#ali fitofarma#o pu itan #alo /ia ta fila tui pse#ases se #athe fitoi H

7hich bottle pesticidei ;A!! that &as good for the leaves !litic i sprayed

to every plantH

7hich bottle of pesticide that &as good fot is leaves did you spray to

every plantHF

3air/lis" readi!%

3'&'3 Summary

To conclude based on the common properties that the t&o groups of verbs have revealed

&ith respect to R and the availability of the pair; list reading 0as &ell as from the results

elicited from a series of other syntactic tests that are listed in Appendi" %1 therepresentation proposed for the ((to configuration of the +ouble 9b/ect verbs can be

also adopted for the respective configuration of the spray;load verbsF* The ne"t step is

to present the already proposed theory for the ((to configuration of the +* 9 verbs that

of Anagnostopoulou 03JJ=b1*

3C


30/98

3%2 na nostopou"ou s 2 3$7 ana" sis

Anagnostopoulou 03JJ=b1 in her boo# dealt &ith +* 9 verbs and argued that the t&o

complements in the ((to configuration of the +9 and the spray;load verbsF appear in

the same minimal domain 0as given in 3315 this proposal &as based on the results from

several syntactic tests such as -B and the each***the otherF construction among others

0see Appendi" % for these tests1 in &hich the above results &ere replicated namely that

the t&o complements mutual c;command each other and thus they appear in the same

minimal domain*

Under Anagnostopoulou,s syntactic representation in &hich the t&o complements appear

to c;command each other 033a 33b1 all the above properties derive naturally and come asno surprise: to begin &ith either complement can be passivized since these are in the

same minimal domain5 moreover inverse scope and -B is also licensed because there

is no head intervening &hich &ould prevent the second complement in surface from

raising or binding inside the first one 0accordingly all the results from the tests in

Appendi" % can be accounted for1* )inally this syntactic representation is able to provide

us &ith the t&o orders that are encountered 0+(;(( ((;+(1 since either position of the

t&o complements in the tree is suitable for the t&o types of complements the +( or the(( as can be seen in 033a1 and 033b1 belo&:

033a1

-(3

+( -,3

- ((

=J


31/98

033b1

-(3

(( -,3

- +(

Adopting the above representation also for the ((to configuration of the spray;loadF

verbs that has revealed the same properties &ith the respective frame of the +* 9 verbs

&e are in the position to account also for the properties that the ((to frame of the spray;

loadF verbs manifested above in =*6*6 and =*6*3 0as &ell as in the tests given in theAppendi" %1*

.aving then concluded that the syntactic structure of the ((to configuration is common

bet&een the t&o groups of verbs in uestion and having presented the same syntactic

representation above 0331 let me no& move to the other prepositional frame that is

available &ith the spray;loadF group the ((&ith configuration*

=6


32/98

Chapter 4

The PPwith frame

As &e have seen above in chapter 3 the ((&ith configuration differs from the ((toframe in that R and -B are not available in the former construction in either English

063b 6Db1 or $ree# 06=b 6 b respectively1* Remember though that scrambling &hich is

possible in $ree# changed both scope and binding relations in the ((&ith frame 06=c and

6 c respectively1* %n the present chapter % &ill further e"plore the syntactic properties of

this prepositional configuration in $ree# and % &ill test &hether the syntactic analyses

that have been proposed for this frame are also able to account for the properties of the

$ree# spray;loadF verbs* Since there have been claims that the ((&ith configuration

shares the same syntactic structure &ith the $en; Acc of the +* 9 verbs 0Bruening 3JJ61

% &ill also carry out the comparison bet&een the t&o frames 0D*31* After having evaluated

Bruening,s proposal 0D*=1 % &ill turn our attention to an alternative proposal that of

4echner 0D*D1 and indicate ho& his theory manages to account for the $ree# data5 % &ill

end this chapter by raising some issues that need to be further e"plored*

4%1 8ruenin s 2 17 theor

To begin &ith Bruening 03JJ61 correlates spray;loadF verbs &ith +ouble 9b/ect verbs

and more precisely the ((&ith configuration to the $en; A!! one* Bruening,s proposal

is based on the notion of a general principle of economy of Shortest 03=1 as proposed in

Richards 06CCI1* This frame&or# assumes that movement is driven by featural attraction

to a head5 in order for the attracted element to enter into a chec#ing relation &ith this

head movement to the specifier of that head is re uired* Shortest constrains &hich

element the head attracts the Shortest Attract 0see 3D for the notion of Attract1 and ho&far the element moves the Shortest Move*

03=1 Shortest

A pair 3 of eleme!"s ,< obe-s >&or"es" iff "&ere is !o +ell/formed pair 3?

+&i$& $a! be $rea"ed b- subs"i"u"i!% for ei"&er or


33/98

$omma!ded b- o!e eleme!" of 3? a!d domi!a"i!% "&e o"&er is smaller "&a! "&e se"

of !odes $/$omma!ded b- o!e eleme!" of 3 a!d domi!a"i!% "&e o"&er.

03D1 Attract

A! a""ra$"or @ a""ra$"s a fea"ure 1, $rea"i!% a $op- a? of a! eleme!" a $o!"ai!i!%

1, a!d mer%i!% a? +i"& @. &e rela"io!s be"+ee! a?, @ a!d 1 mus" obe- >&or"es".

Applying the above conditions in a structure as the one in 03 a1 Shortest enforces to

move prior to < because the set of nodes dominating is smaller than the set of nodes

dominating < 03 b15 this does not mean ho&ever that < cannot move* 9nce has moved

to the specifier of K < is still able to move as it is the ne"t &ell formed pair of elements

0(1 formed &ith K and there is no other &ell formed pair (,* The ne"t uestion is &here < &ill move* has already moved to the specifier of K5 Shortest forces < to tuc# in 03 c1

since it constrains the distance bet&een W and W, as short as possible 0and for this reason

3 d is e"cluded1*

03 1 a* XK X'* X'WYYY

b* XK( , XK ' X'WYYY

c* XK( , XK( W, XK X' X'WYYYYY

d* OXK( W, XK( , XK X' X'WYYYYY

Bruening assumes that R involves optional features selected by an appropriate head

&ith a (;feature* This (;feature enables the uantifier to raise or the latter is unable to do

so* Specifically for English the semantics of a (;feature is an inherent property of the

+(* Therefore the probe &hich is the little vF at present 0!homs#y 3JJJ1 is going to

loo# for one uantificational goal or more as in the +ouble 9b/ect constructions* 7here

movement of the attracted element &ill occur is defined by Shortest 03=1* Bruening

provides in detail the &ay the derivation occurs but in &hat &e are mostly interested at

present is ho& frozenF scope 0the inability of the Theme to raise and to uantify over the

$oal1 derives from his analysis*

==


34/98

Bruening 03JJ61 adopting Marantz,s 06CC=1 representation for the +ouble 9b/ect

construction assumes that the t&o complements of the ((&ith frame belong to t&o

separate domains 0contrary to the ones in the ((to one1 as an applicative head is assumed

to be present &hich introduces the second complement in Accusative 0the Theme1*

Therefore even if both complements are uantifiers and for that reason attracted by the

probe v the first complement the $oal in $enitive &ill al&ays be attracted first obeying

Attract and Shortest follo&ed by the Theme in Accusative that &ill tuc# in belo& it

obeying Shortest as &ell as given in 03 1* %t is therefore e"pected that Scope bet&een the

t&o complements &ill al&ays be frozen as the $oal &ill al&ays be attracted before the

Theme*

03 1 v(3

a $&ild m v(3

e'er- boo j v(3

Sub/ v Bo&! 3

v 9P 1 %a'e p 3

$oal - 6 " m 3

- 6 9P 2" p 3

- 3 Theme " p " j

=D


35/98

!rucially Bruening goes on a step further proposing that the $en;Acc and the ((&ith

configuration of the +ouble 9b/ect and the spray;loadF verbs respectively should be

represented syntactically in the same &ay* This suggestion is based on the results from

the follo&ing tests on scope and binding 03I;=61:

a. The unavailability of the Theme to R over the $oal in both frames*

(CDamples (Eb) a!d (Fb) respe$"i'el- i! Grue!i!%)

03Ia1 The teacher gave a 0Vdifferent1 student every boo# ;e'er-:a

03Ib1 Maud draped a 0Vdifferent1 armchair &ith every sheet ;e'er-:a

b. The impossibility of pair;list 0(;41 reading in &h; uestions6=:

(CDamples (ia) i! f!.* a!d (Hb) i! Grue!i!% respe$"i'el-)03Ga1 7hich student did you give ti the Medal of E"cellenceH ;3/I

03Gb1 7hich &all did he spray ti &ith every color of paintH ;3/I

$. The ungrammaticality of uantifier -ariable Binding 0 -B1 and hence the

impossibility of the Theme to raise over the $oal*

(CDamples (8Jb) a!d (8Eb) i! Grue!i!% respe$"i'el-)

03Ca1 Mona sent a professor &ho,d revie&ed it i every boo# i ;e'er-:a

03Cb1 Maud draped an armchair that matched itsi color &ith

every sheeti ;e'er-:a

d. )rozen scope arising in Antecedent !ontained +eletion cases

(CDamples (J8b) a!d (JJb) i! Grue!i!% respe$"i'el-)

0=Ja1 9zzy gave someone everything that Belinda did X-( Z Y* ;e'er-:a

0=Jb1 !leo &rapped a 0Vdifferent1 bedpost &ith every dress ;e'er-:a

!hloe did X-( Z Y*

e* And finally the availability of the Theme to raise over the Sub/ect 0=61:6= Bruening 03JJ61 refers to the peculiarity of this test &hen applied in the $en; Acc frame since forsome spea#ers e"traction out of the the $en* is in any case ungrammatical5 for more on this see fn*

in his paper .

=


36/98

(CDamples (JKa) a!d (JJb) respe$"i'el-)

0=6a1 A 0different1 teacher gave me every boo# e'er-:a

0=6b1 H At least t&o children smeared that board &ith each

color of paint ea$&: a" leas" "+o

Based on the above Bruening proposed that the t&o frames share the same syntactic

structure in &hich the t&o complements belong to t&o separate domains 0=31* Under this

analysis because of the presence of the Applicative head in both the $en; Acc and

((&ith configuration the phenomenon of )rozen Scope arises5 the $oal that has been

generated higher than the Theme in the tree &ill al&ays be attracted before it* Moreover

due to Shortest even if both complements are uantifiers the Theme &ill al&ays tuc# in

and it &ill be unable to scope over the $oal 0=31*

0=31 v(

3

a $ar m v(3

e'er- boD j v(3

Sub/ v Le 3

v 9P 1 loaded p 3

$oal - 6 " m 3

- 6 9P 2" p 3

- 3 (( " p 3

( Theme

=


37/98

+i"& " j

Turning no& to the $ree# ((&ith frame % &ill test belo& &hether the $en; Acc and the

((&ith configuration of the +*9 and the spray;loadF verbs behave similarly &ith each

other also in $ree# 0D*31 and if they do &hether their properties are identical to the ones

of English; the t&o complements belong to t&o separate domains5 if this proves to be the

case then Bruening,s proposal could be also adopted for the $ree# ((&ith configuration*

=I


38/98

4%2 Comparin the PPwith frame of )spra !"oad* #er$s to the 'en! cc of

the .ou$"e /$0ect roup in 'ree(%

Before applying some syntactic tests to the t&o configurations in uestion let me briefly

refer to the analysis that has been proposed &ith respect to the $en; Acc configuration of

the +* 9 verbs in $ree# since the ((&ith configuration of the $ree# spray;loadF verbs

has not been analyzed e"tensively before*

Regarding $en; Acc construction Anagnostopoulou 03JJ=b1 has argued that genitive

goals are al&ays generated higher than the accusative themes 0the $en; Acc order is the

base generated one1 and that the Acc;$en order derives from A, movement of the

Theme across the $oal* This claim is based on the results from the tests of -B 7!9effects the each'the otherF construction and the con/oined &h;phrases 0see section

D*3*3 for the test of -B and Appendi" %% for these tests1* Scope facts are not included in

Anagnostopoulou,s analysis but % have applied the relevant test and % present it belo&

0see section D*3*61*

The results from the tests belo& 0in D*3*6 and D*3*316D suggest on one hand that the t&o

configurations the $en; Acc of the +*9 verbs and the ((&ith frame of the spray;loadFverbs behave syntactically the same* 9n the other hand $ree# differs from English since

both in the ((&ith frame 06=c = c1 and in the $en; Acc construction 0as &ill be sho&n

belo& in ==b and = c1 scrambling changes scope and binding relations 0vs* English in

&hich scrambling is unavailable1*

+'2'& /uanti#ier aisin"

6D % have included belo& the most representative tests to my opinion uantifer Raising and uantifier-ariable Binding* )or the complete list of the tests 0the each'the otherF construction pair;list

reading 7!9 effects and the test of the con/oined &h; phrases1 see Appendi" %%*

=G


39/98

7e have already seen that the Theme in the ((&ith configuration cannot raise over the

$oal 06=b repeated from above1 but for scrambling of the Theme across the $oal has

ta#en place 06=c1* The same results are replicated in the $en; Acc configuration of the

+*9 verbs5 inverse scope is impossible 0==a1 unless scrambling occurs 0==b1 &hich

licenses both readings6 *

0==a1 % $iota edose enos 0Vd/aforeti#u1 pediu 0to1 #athe doroMM ;e'er-:a

% $iota;89M gave a 0Vdifferent1 child;$E8 0the1 every gift;A!!

$iota gave a 0Vdifferent1 child each giftF

0==b1 % $iota edose ena 0d/aforeti#o1 doro 0tu1 #athe pediu 031

The $iota;89M gave a 0different1 gift;A!! 0the1 every child;$E8$iota gave a 0different1 gift to every childF

06=b1 P Manolis fortose ena 0Vd/aforeti#o1 ama#si me #athe #uti;e'er- : a

The Manolis;89M loaded a 0Vdifferent1 car;A!! &ith every bo"

Manolis loaded a 0Vdifferent1 car &ith every bo"F

06=c1 9 Manolis fortose me ena 0d/aforeti#o1 #uti to #athe ama#si 031

The Manolis;89M loaded &ith a 0different1 bo" the every car;A!!

Manolis loaded every car &ith a 0different1 bo"F

+'2'2 /uanti#ier 1ariable indin"

6 8ote that the surface reading in the e"ample 0==b1 is not the preffered one* Remember that this &asthe case also &ith the ((&ith frame 0see fn* 661* % &ill not e"plore this issue at present since the same

problem 0regarding the acceptability of the non plausible reading1 occurs also in the ((to frame of

both English and $ree#*

=C


40/98

Applying the test of -B &e observe the follo&ing for both frames: the $oal has to c;

command the Theme and uantifier variable binding of the second complement inside

the first one is impossible 00=Da vs =Db1 for the $en; Acc and 0= a vs = b1 for the ((&ith

frame respectively1* .o&ever if scrambling ta#es place and thus the Theme raises over

the $oal then uantifier variable binding is licensed in either frame 0=Dc = c1* 8ote that

this &as also the case &ith R5 ambiguity arose above in both frames &hen scrambling

too# place 0==b and 6=c1*

(CDamples (EFa) $orrespo!ds "o "&e eDample (J9*a) i! A!a%!os"opoulou J99Eb)

0=Da1 Edhosa tu #athe fititii tin erghasia tu i$ave the every student;$E8 i the paper hisi

% gave every student his term paperF

0=Db1 HOEdhosa tu fititi tui tin #athe er/asia i$ave the student its;$E8 i the every home&or# iHO % gave its student every paperF

0=Dc1 Edhosa tin er/asia tui tu #athe fititii$ave the paper hisi the every studentiO % gave his paper every studentF

0= a1 9 $ianis fortose to #athe container i me to fortio tu iThe $ianis loaded the every container;A!! i &ith the load !litic;$E8 i


41/98

The $ianis loaded &ith the load !litic;$E8 i the every container;A!! iO


42/98


43/98

0=Ia1 Ou edhosa to vivlio ston >iani

!litic;$E8 gave the boo#;A!! to;the >iani

% gave the boo# to iani

!litic;$E8 the boo#;A!! from the >iani

% too# the boo# from


44/98

4%4 &echner s theor 1 57

4echner,s theory differs a great deal from Bruening,s above as it pursues the idea that

uantifier scope ambiguities can be accounted for in a more ade uate &ay if the

mechanism adopted for the interpretation of uantifiers is lo&ering instead of raising6 6I *

Scopal interactions are not considered to be the effect of syntactic reconstruction of a

uantificational term at 4)5 instead they are the result of a lo&ering process in the

semantic component* This lo&ering process is e ual to the Semantic Reconstruction as

defined in !resti 06CC 1 and Rullmann 06CC 1 &hich &as originally proposed as a scope

fi"ing mechanism for &h; e"pressions* 4echner e"tends the notion of Sem*

Reconstruction to non;interrogative uantificational terms* Additionally he distinguishes

Semantic from Syntactic reconstruction the %ndependence .ypothesisF as he calls it providing empirical support from the interaction of uantifier scope &ith (rinciple A of

the Binding Theory and pronominal variable binding in scrambling and topicalization

constructions 0for more on this see section D in 4echner 6CC 1* According to this theory

languages that conform to the above pattern belong to the so;called scope rigidF group

of languages5 such languages are $erman Korean and


45/98


46/98

0=Cb1 X)ast /edem freund der )reundeYi has Mindestens einer ti den $ast

vorgestelt

Almost every friend of the friends has at least one everybody the guest

introduced

At least one person has introduced the guest to almost every friend each

of the friendsF (8)O P!i'. : CDis".

%n addition 4echner argues for the dichotomy bet&een syntactic and semantic

reconstruction providing empirical support &ith e"amples that re uire either SemRec or

SyntRec 0for more on this see section D*6 and D*3 in 4echner 6CC 1* 7hat is interesting

at present is that 4echner predicts ambiguity only &hen reconstruction ta#es place5other&ise it is the surface order that defines the scope of the uantifiers and no scope

interaction is e"pected*

+'+'& Applyin" 5echner6s theory in Greek

4echner,s predictions are verified as &e have seen in the $ree# $en; Acc and the ((&ith

frame* Ambiguity arose 06=c and ==b in the $en; A!! and the ((&ith configuration

respectively1 and binding &as licensed in both frames 0=Dc and = c respectively1 only&hen reconstruction had ta#en place5 in all other cases there &as no scope ambiguity

06=b and ==a1 and binding &as not licensed either 0=Db and = b for the t&o

configurations respectively1 in accordance to 4echner,s predictions* 8ote that it is due to

the optionality of SemRec that the &ide scope reading can be accounted for since in

different case only the inverse scope &ould be e"pected to be available*

Adopting 4echner,s theory for the $en; Acc and the ((&ith frame entails that $ree#

belongs to the group of the scope rigidF languages* Moreover that the base generated

order is the +($en; +(Acc and the +(Acc;((&ith one for the t&o frames respectively

and that the reverse surface order is the result of reconstruction5 in other &ords that the

order $oal; Theme is the base generated one*

D


47/98

Additionally it &ill have to be assumed that both direct and indirect ob/ects in $ree#

may strand a higher type trace in their case position 0Spec Agr9( Spec Agr%9(1 and

moreover these have to be &ea# 8(,s* The latter is confirmed as can be seen by the

e"amples belo&: ambiguity arises only &hen scrambling ta#es place and under the

condition that the uantificational (hrase 0 (1 is &ea# 0compare DJa to 6=c belo& and

DJb to ==b for the t&o frames respectively1*

0DJa1 9 $ianis edose #athe doro enos ped/u 061

The $ianis gave every present;A!! a child;$E8

O


48/98

0D6a1 4): X!( AgrS( X8(i v Xedose / XAgr9( Xena doroYm XAgr%9( ( # XAgr+9( Tm X-( 8( i t /( # tm YYYYYY

0D6b1 4): X!( AgrS( X8(i v Xfortose / XAgr9( Xme ena #utiYm XAgr%9( ( # XAgr+9( Tm X-( 8( it / ( # tm YYYYYY

Adopting this analysis &e are in the position to account for the ambiguity arising in the

$en; Acc and the ((&ith configuration &hen reconstruction ta#es place* The mechanism

of 4o&ering the presence of the higher type trace as &ell as the optionality of the

process of Reconstruction as proposed in 4echner 06CC 1 enable us to account for the

$ree# facts ade uately and for this reason 4echner,s theory can be adopted for the these

t&o frames* !rucially in opposition to Bruening,s theory there is no applicative head present the t&o complements are not considered to be in t&o different domains and

thus ambiguity that arises &hen reconstruction ta#es place can be accounted for*

+espite the fact that 4echner,s theory predicts the ambiguity arises in the t&o frames in

uestion only &hen scrambling ta#es place there are t&o important issues that should be

further e"plored* $enerally spea#ing the first issue concerns the implications that arise

from adopting the mechanism of Reconstruction to account for &hat traditionally has been analyzed in terms of R* %n other &ords one &ould have to test &hether this

mechanism proves to be able to account for the cases that have been e"plained so far &ith

scrambling* Moreover even if lo&ering is adopted to account for scrambling the issue

&hether this is optional as 4echner 06CC 1 assumes or it is obligatory 0Boscovic and

Ta#ahashi 6CCG see also footnote 6 1 needs to be further searched*

The other issue is related specifically to the $en; Acc configuration* Anagnostopoulou

03JJ61 has claimed that in the $en; Acc frame of the +* 9 verbs an applicative head is

present distinguishing this group from a subgroup the teachF group in &hich there is no

applicative head 0this claim is based on passivization and derivational processes such as

nominalization5 see *6*6;= for the tests15 crucially 4echner,s 06CC 1 theory does not

DG


49/98

assume such a head in order to account for the ambiguity* 9ne &ould have to deal further

&ith this issue as &ell*

%n sum &e have not been able to provide a secure analysis for the ((&ith configuration

of the spray;loadF verbs5 both in 4echner,s 06CC 1 and Bruening,s 03JJ61 theory there

are important issues &hich have been raised and have been left unans&ered and &hich %

&ill not further e"plore in the current thesis* %nstead % &ill no& move to present and

e"plore the non; prepositional frames of the $ree# spray;loadF verbs focusing on the +*

Acc configuration*

DC


50/98

Chapter 5

Non! PP frames

As &e have seen in section 06* 1 there are t&o non;(( frames that are available &ith thespray;loadF verbs the +* Acc and the $en; A!! one* The use of the latter as has been

noted above is very limited since on one hand it re uires an animate $oal

0see Ia vs* Ib above1 and on the other its acceptability depends on the idiolect of the

spea#er* %n the present chapter % &ill limit myself to e"plore the +* Acc analysis since it

is the most commonly used non;(( configuration*

The chapter is structured as it follo&s: firstly % &ill present briefly the sub class of the

+ouble 9b/ect verbs that also licenses the +* Acc the teachF class and ho& this is

analyzed in the bibliography 0section *61* %n the follo&ing section 0 *31 % &ill test

&hether the common frame the +* Acc displays the same syntactic properties in the t&o

groups the spray;loadF and the +* 9 group* (rovided that the tests &ill indicate that the

t&o frames do not behave the same syntactically another analysis &ill be proposed for

the +* Acc of the spray;loadF verbs along the lines of the partitive hypothesis 0Kipars#y

6CCG section *=1*

5%1 n introduction to the .% cc of the .ou$"e /$0ect #er$s

Anagnostopoulou 03JJ61 argued that +ouble 9b/ect verbs should be divided in t&o

classes: !lass % &hich contains verbs such as give offerF and !lass %% in &hich belong

verbs such as teach pay treat and serveF* Anagnostopoulou claims that these t&o

categories should be distinguished and represented syntactically in a different &ay5

namely in the former group an applicative head is present introducing the second

complement in Accusative ; the Theme; &hereas there is no such applicative head in the

latter group the +ouble Accusative one and the t&o complements belong in the same

minimal domain* This proposal &as based on the different syntactic behavior of the t&o

classes &ith respect to +erivational processes 0nominalization and ad/ectival passives 0D3

and D= respectively1 and passive 0DD1 among others:

J


51/98

5%1%1 Nomina"i;ation

As can be seen in 0D31 !lass % does not license nominalization of the $oal &hereas !lass

%% does*

(CDamples (FJa) a!d (FEa) respe$"i'el- i! A!a%!os"opoulou J998)

0D3a1 To harisma enos vivliu O to harisma enos pediu

The gift of a boo# Othe gift of a child 0i*e* to a child1

0D3b1 % didas#alia ton mathimati#on i didas#alia ton ped/on

The teaching of math the teaching of the children

5%1%2 d0ecti#a" Passi#es

Ad/ectival passives &ith $oal e"ternalization are not licensed in !lass % but they do so in

!lass %%*

(CDamples (F9b) a!d (F8b) respe$"i'el- i! A!a%!os"opoulou J998)

0D=a1 Ena prosfata ni#iasmeno afto#inito Oenas prosfata ni#iasmenos pelatis

A recently rene&ed car O a recently rented customer

0D=b1 9 prosfata servirismenos cafes o prosfata servirismenos pelatis

The recently served coffee the recently served customer

5%1%3 Passi#e

!oming ne"t to passive voice the theme can be passivized and cliticization of the Theme

is possible &ith the verbs of !lass % 0DDa1 but not &ith the ones of class %% 0DDb1*

(CDamples (*9a) a!d (*Ha) respe$"i'el- i! A!a%!os"opoulou J998)

0DDa1 To vivlio 0tu1 dothi#e tu (etru

The boo#;89M !litic;$E8 given the (eter;$E8

The boo# &as given to (eterF

0DDb1 OTo mathima 0to1 didahti#e ta ped/a

The course;89M !litic;A!! taught the children;A!!

The course &as taught to the childrenF

6


52/98

+ue to this applicative head nominalization of the Theme is prohibited in !lass % 0D3a1

and Myers, generalization 06CGD1 is violated &hen ad/ectival passives &ith goals are

formed 0D=a1* %n addition the fact that the Theme can be passivized indicates that both

arguments have features to chec# in the $en; Acc construction 0DDa1* 9n the other hand

as a conse uence of the absence of this Applicative head in the +* Acc configuration

nominalization of the Theme is possible 0D3b1 0since the t&o complements are in the

same minimal domain1 there is no violation of Myer,s generalization 0D=b1 and given

that the Theme does not enter into E(( !ase chec#ing relation it can neither be

passivized nor undergo !litic doubling 0DDb1*

A natural uestion that no& arises is &hether the +* Acc of the spray;loadF shares the

same properties &ith the +* Acc encountered in the teachF class and thus the samesyntactic representation should be adopted* The follo&ing section deals &ith this issue*

3


53/98

5%2 Comparin the .% cc of the )spra !"oad* and the .ou$"e /$0ect

#er$s

% have chosen to include apart from the test of uantifier Raising 0 *3* 1 and uantifier-ariable Binding 0 *3* 1 the tests of nominalization 0 *3*61 the formation of ad/ectival

passives &ith $oal e"ternalization 0 *3*31 the Theme incorporation 0 *3*=1 and

passivization 0 *3*D1 since these tests &ere crucial in order for Anagnostopoulou 03JJ61

to decide on the presence or not of an applicative head in the structure of the +* Acc

configuration 0&ith the e"ception of Theme incorporation1* !rucially in the last

subsection 0 *3* 1 % &ill focus on the differences that have been observed

0Anagnostopoulou 3JJ=b1 bet&een the t&o groups &ith respect to the type of the +( that

is licensed as a Theme in the +* Acc configuration of the t&o groups of verbs*

The general conclusion is that despite the fact that the +* Acc configuration seems to

behave similarly in many respects 0tests of nominalization ad/ectival passives and theme

incorporation1 there are crucial differences bet&een the t&o groups of verbs &ith respect

to passive R and -B and above all to the type of the +( that is licensed as a theme

in the t&o groups of verbs6G*

,'2'& 7ominali8ation

Either complement can be nominalized in both spray;loadF and teachF class as can be

seen in 0D 1:

0D a1 % didas#alia tis himias ton ped/on

The teaching the chemistry;$E8 the children;$E8

^The teaching of chemistry the children^

6G % have also tested the each***the otherF construction the availability of the pair;list reading and the7!9 effects the results of &hich confirm the above conclusion and &hich can be all found in

Appendi" %%%*

=


54/98

0D b1 To fortoma ton #ution tu ama#siu

The loading the bo"es;$E8 the car;$E8

^The loading of the bo"es the car^

,'2'2 Adjectival passives !ith "oal e9ternali8ation

Either class may also form ad/ectival passives &ith $oal e"ternalization 0D 1:

0D a1 +idagmena ped/a

Taught children

0D b1 )ortomemo ama#si

4oaded car

,'2'3 (heme incorporation

Moreover the t&o groups behave similarly &ith respect to Theme incorporation5 the

Theme can be omitted in either group as long as it is realized as a bare +( 0compare DIa

to DIb and DGa to DGb for the t&o groups respectively1:

0DIa1 9 $ianis dida#se ta ped/a

The $ianis;89M taught the children;A!!

^


55/98

0DGb1 O9 $ianis fortose sto ama#si

The $ianis;89M loaded to;the car;A!!

^


56/98


57/98

The test of -B suggests that the $oal needs to c;command the Theme in the +* A!! of

the +* 9 verbs and that binding of the second complement inside the first is not licensed

0 =a vs* =b1* 8ote that &hen scrambling ta#es place the result is also grammatical 0 =c1

0confirming our assumption in section D*D that $ree# belongs to the group of the scope

rigid languages1* 9n the other hand the result is deviant &hen -B is applied in the +*

Acc of the spray;loadF verbs 0 Da Db15 note though that 0 Da1 tends to be considered

slightly better that 0 Db136*

0 =a1 P $ianis dida#se ton #athe mathitii tin mitri#i tui /losa

The $ianis taught the every student;A!! the mother !litic tongue;A!!


58/98

The $ianis;8om loaded the container !litici the every load;A!! i that

!litic i corresponded

O


59/98

The $ianis taught the students;A!! math;A!!


60/98

The general conclusion is that the common configuration bet&een the t&o groups the +*

Acc one proves to have some similarities but crucially it does not sho& the same

properties in the t&o groups of verbs5 for this reason % &ill move to present a theory that

can account for the properties of the +* Acc of the spray;loadF group*

J


61/98

5%3 The Partiti#e na" sis

)ocusing on the differences arising on the type of the +(theme in the t&o groups

0discussed in section *3*I1 and specifically in the spray;loadF group in &hich % am

mostly interested in the present thesis % &ill attempt to provide an analysis that &ill be

able to account for the appearance of these restrictions as &ell as for the

ungrammaticality of the other tests such as of R 0 *3* 1 0or of the pair;list reading and

the each'the otherF construction among others listed in Appendi" %%%1* % &ill firstly

present the theoretical claims and arguments of the theory 0 *D1 and then ho& this can be

applied in $ree# 0 * 1*

To begin &ith one &ould not fail to notice that the restrictions regarding the type of the+( Theme &hich has to be either a bare +( or a mass noun 0 c d1 reminds us a lot

of the (artitive case 0section 3*=*3 in Anagnostopoulou 3JJ=b1 encountered in the Balto;

)innic subfamily Russian Mordinavian 0%t#onen 6CI31 as &ell as in many other dialects

such as 4appish 0E* %t#onen 6CI3 6CI= among others1* $oal of the present section is to

test &hether the properties of the +* Acc can be accounted for in terms of a partitiveF

analysis*

Regarding partitive case +e .oop 06CC31 proposed an enriched typological system in

&hich Accusative case &as distinguished in Strong and 7ea# accusative case* The

traditional recognized accusative case corresponded to the Strong accusative case in +e

.oop,s analysis &hereas the default case configurationally licensed at +;structure &as

the 7ea# accusative case* 7hat differentiated Strong accusative case from the 7ea# one

&as that the latter &as licensed by a subclass of verbs of accusative verbs and not by all

of them 0vs* the Strong accusative case1* +ue to the fact that 7ea# accusative case &as

licensed at +;structure 8(,s bearing &ea# accusative case could not undergo

scrambling*

Moreover +e .oop proposed that 8(s that bear 7ea# structural case had an e"istential

reading and they &ere predicate modifiers; not real arguments5 they combined

6


62/98

semantically &ith the verbal predicate restricting its denotation in the manner of adverbial

modifiers* 9n the other hand 8(s that bear Strong Accusative case had referential

reading and &ere true arguments*

+e .oop,s theory e"pectations though failed &hen her theory &as applied in )innish as

complements bearing (artitive case may scramble similarly to the ones bearing

Accusative case and the e"istential reading of the 7ea# structural case does not hold

al&ays 0see section = in Kipars#y 6CCG for more on this1* )or this reason an alternative

theory that of Kipars#y 06CCG1 &hich diagnoses and accounts for (artitive case on a

different basis &ill be presented and pursued*

5%4


63/98

0 Gb1 ( is !umulative iff " X(0"1 sup 0" (1 ` yX" y (0y1YY

0 Gc1 ( is +iverse iff " y X(0"1 (0y1 " y ` " y y "Y

.aving defined uantitavely indeterminate plurals and mass nouns as unbounded 0 I1the definition of the unbounded -( predicate can no& be given* The latter is determined

compositionally from the unboundedness of its constituents 0 C1:

0 C1 A -( predicate is unbounded if it has either an unbounded head or an

unbounded argument*

Mar#ing the unboundedness of the le"ical predicates as 0X;BY Bounded X BY

Bounded1 some e"amples &ould be analyzed as it follo&s in Kipars#y,s system:

P!bou!ded 3 3redi$a"esO these have either an unbounded head or ob/ect

0 J1 a* They hated 0;B1 the bombs 0 B1

b* They dropped 0 B1 bombs 0;B1

Gou!ded 3 3redi$a"esO they have neither an unbounded head nor an ob/ect

0 61 a* They dropped 0 B1 the bombs 0 B1 b* They dropped 0 B1 many bombs 0 B1

5%5 pp" in


64/98

7ith bo"es


65/98

Kipars#y notes that a helpful diagnostic so as to characterize a predicate as unbounded is

by its ability to be modified by degree adverbs such as: 0some1 more a lot very much a

bit among othersF 0compare the e"amples in to the ones in 1*

P!bou!ded 'erbal predi$a"es (eDamples *b a!d *$ respe$"i'el- i! @ipars - 8NNK)O

0 a1 % loo#ed for the #ey a lot

0 b1 Mary &anted the boo# very much

Gou!ded 'erbal predi$a"es (eDamples Hb a!d H$ respe$"i'el- i! @ipars - 8NNK)O

0 a1 V % founded the #ey a lot

0 b1 V Mary o&ned the boo# very much

The same test can be also applied in $ree# and &e are in the position to determine

&hether a predicate is unbounded or not 0compare I to G1:

P!bou!ded 'erbal predi$a"es

0 Ia1 Epsa#sa ya to #lidi poli

4oo#ed for the #ey;A!! a; lot

% loo#ed for the #ey a lotF

0 Ib1 % Maria ithele to vilvio poli

The Maria &anted the boo#;A!! a;lot

Maria &anted the boo# a lotF

Gou!ded 'erbal predi$a"es

0 Ga1 V-ri#a to #lidi poli

)ound the #ey;A!! a; lotV % found the #ey a lotF

0 Gb1 V% Maria #atihe to vilvio poli

The Maria #atihe the boo#;A!! a;lot


66/98

V Maria o&ned the boo# a lotF

Moreover Kipars#y argues that the same tests can be applied to help us identify the class

of unbounded uantitative indeterminate 8(s that get 8(;related case 0compare Ca to

IJa1* Applying the same diagnostic in $ree# &e can also discover the respective class of

the 8(s that get 8(;related case 0 Cb vs* IJb respectively for $ree#1:

P!bou!ded 23 predi$a"es

0 Ca1 A lot of bears a lot of coffee

0 Cb1 (oles ar#udes polis #afes

A;lot;of bears a;lot;of coffee

A lot of bears a lot of coffeeF

Gou!ded 23 predi$a"es

0IJa1 V A lot of bear a lot of a bear

0IJb1 V (oli ar#uda V poli apo mia ar#uda

A;lot;of bear a;lot;of from a bear

V a lot of bear a lot of a bearF

Therefore although the predicate seems to fail in the test of the unboundedness of the

predicate 0I6a b1 suggesting that these are bounded predicates &e see that the 8( passes

the test in 0I31 implying that the Theme in Accusative belongs to the class of uantitative

indeterminate 8(s that bear 8( related case:

0I6a1 V)ortoses to forti/o #utia polu ligo

4oaded the truc#;A!! bo"es;A!! a;lot a;bit

V >ou loaded the car &ith bo"es a lot a bitF

0I6b1 VAlipses to tapsi ladi poli ligo

Smeared the pan;A!! oil;A!! a;lot a bit

V >ou smeared the pan &ith oil a lot a bitF


67/98

0I3a1 0)ortose to forti/o1 pola #utia poli ladi

04oaded the truc#1 a;lot;of bo"es a;lot;of oil

0.e she loaded the truc#1 &ith a lot of bo"es a lot of oilF

0I3b1 V 0)ortose to forti/o1 poli #uti poli apo to ena #uti

04oaded the truc#1 a;lot;of bo";A!! a;lot;of from the a bo";A!!

V 0.e she loaded the truc#1 &ith a lot of bo" a lot of a the bo"F

Therefore according to 0 C1 &hich defines a predicate as unbounded if it has either an

unbounded head or an unbounded argument and 0I3a1 &hich suggests that the argument

is unbounded &e are lead to conclude that loadF in 0I=1 is an unbounded predicate0remember Kipars#y,s representation of a0n1 un;bounded predicate in 0 J 61 above1

0I=1 9 $ianis fortose 0 B1 to forti/o #utia 0;B1

The $ianis loaded 0 B1 the truc#;A!! bo"es;A!!


68/98


69/98

Chapter 6

6%1 /pen Issues

Though &e may have provided some ans&ers regarding spray;loadF verbs in $ree#such as the frames and the properties of this group the similarities and the differences

&ith respect to the group of +ouble 9b/ect verbs there are several uestions either

unans&ered or not raised at all to &hich % &ill attempt to refer briefly in the present

section*

To begin &ith let me remind to the reader that the parallelism bet&een the ((&ith

configuration of the spray;loadF verbs and the $en; Acc configuration of the +* 9 verbs

&hich &as supported by the syntactic tests in chapter D 0contrasting though Bruening,s

3JJ6 syntactic analysis1 meets problems regarding case assignment 0Anagnostopoulou

3JJ=b15 to this problem % have not provided a solution but % have left it open for future

research* 7hat % &ould li#e to add to this open issue is that these findings raise also

another problem &hich concerns the structure of the $en; Acc configuration of the +* 9

group* Anagnostopoulou 03JJ61 has argued that an applicative head is present 0vs* the

teachF class in &hich there is no such head available1* .o&ever our findings and more

specifically the inverse scope reading that &as available &hen scrambling too# place0sections D*3*6 and D*3*31 argues against such analysis 0and for that reason also

Bruening,s 03JJ61 proposal &as considered inade uate to account for the $ree# data1* %

&ill also leave this latter issue open for further research*

!oming ne"t to the +* Acc configuration of the spray;loadF verbs as has been already

mentioned at the end of chapter there is no dependable evidence supporting the relation

bet&een the t&o complements* .o&ever since some native spea#ers considered to some

e"tent better the e"amples in &hich the $oal c;commanded the Theme &hen the tests of

-B 0 *3* 1 and the 7!9 effects 0Appendi" %%%1 &ere tested this could be a starting

point if &e &ant to further e"plore this configuration so as to understand deeper its

Documents

MAThesis Barouni Final