Causatives in minimalism / Mercedes Tubino Blanco.

Format:

Book

Author/Creator:

Tubino Blanco, Mercedes.

Series:

Linguistik aktuell ; Bd. 179.

Linguistik aktuell/Linguistics today ; v. 179

Language:

English

Subjects (All):

Causative (Linguistics).

Minimalist theory (Linguistics).

Physical Description:

1 online resource (314 p.)

Edition:

1st ed.

Place of Publication:

Amsterdam ; Philadelphia : John Benjamins Pub. Co., 2011.

Language Note:

English

Summary:

This monograph studies issues of current minimalist concern, such as whether differences in the expression of argument and syntactic structure can all be attributed to the parameterization of specific functional heads. In particular, this book studies in-depth the extent to which variation in the expression of causation, available both intra- and crosslinguistically, can be accounted for by appealing only to the microparameterization of the causative head, Cause, as previously argued for by linguists such as Pylkkänen. It concludes that the microparameterization of Cause may explain some major characteristics associated with causatives, but it cannot be regarded as the only explanation behind variation in these structures. The book includes relevant discussion on argument structure and looks in detail at languages, such as the Uto-Aztecan Hiaki, that have not received much attention before. It is mostly intended for an audience interested in theoretical approaches to argument structure and variation.

Contents:

Causatives in Minimalism

Editorial page

Title page

LCC data

Dedication page

Table of contents

Acknowledgements

Abbreviations and symbols

Introduction

Contrasts in causatives

1. Contrasts in causatives

2. Variation in lexical causatives: The causative-inchoative alternation

3. Variation in productive causatives

Theoretical framework

1. Introduction

2. Introducting Pylkkänen (2002, 2008)

2.1 The data

2.2 The lexical vs. productive distinction

2.3 Causation and the Causer

2.3.1 Causation: An argument increasing phenomenon?

2.3.2 The interpretation of the causer-less causatives

2.3.2.1 The adversity interpretation: Japanese

2.3.2.2 The desiderative interpretation: Finnish

2.3.3 Concluding, causers are not intrinsic to causation

3. Pylkkänen's pieces of causation

3.1 The syntax and semantics of Cause

3.1.1 Pylkkänen's Cause

3.1.2 Cause: A little history

3.1.2.1 Larson's VP-shells

3.1.2.2 Light verbs and complex predication

3.1.2.3 Light verbs with null phonological content

3.1.2.4 Different 'flavors' of v

3.1.3 Summary

3.2 Kratzer's (1994, 1996) Voice

4. Pylkkänen's Voice-bundling parameter

4.1 Voice and Cause: Two different functional heads

4.2 The Voice-bundling parameter

5. Selection

5.1 Cause is parameterized for selection

5.1.1 Marantz (1997): Acategorial roots

5.1.2 The Selection parameter

5.2. Summary

6. Voice-bundling and selection working in tandem

6.1 Voice-bundling + Root selecting

6.2 Non-Voice-bundling Cause and embedded agents

6.3 Summary

6.4 Pylkkänen's predictions

7. Discussion and conclusion

Exploring root causatives

2. Hiaki lexical causatives

2.1 Causatives in Hiaki

2.2 Japanese

2.3 Hiaki lexical causatives

2.3.1 Hiaki Lexical vCAUSE: Root selecting.

2.3.2 Hiaki is Non-Voice-bundling

2.3.3 Summary

2.4 Hiaki and Japanese lexical causatives contrasted

2.4.1 Unergatives do not root-causativize in Hiaki

2.4.2 The adversity interpretation of transitive die

2.5 Other suppletive forms in Hiaki

2.5.1 A case study: 'die' crosslinguistically

2.5.2 Suppletion in lexical causatives

2.5.3 Kill as a suppletive lexical causative

2.6 Summary

3. Root causativization of unaccusatives and Voice-bundling

3.1 Suppletion cannot explain all cases

3.2 Testing unaccusativity

3.2.1 break

3.2.2 arrive and appear

3.2.3 break vs{arrive/appear}

3.3 The locative element

3.4 Word order and pro-loc in Romance

3.5 The deictic component and Voice-bundling

3.6 There-construction and locative inversion

3.7 Potential problems

3.7.1 Leave vs arrive

3.7.2 Japanese

3.8 Summary

4. Conclusion

English causatives with make

2. English productive causatives: Make

2.1 English vCAUSE has different flavors

2.2 English make: Phase-selecting vCAUSE

2.2.1 The concept of phase for Pylkkänen

2.2.2 On phases

2.2.3 VoiceP as a phase: Introductory ideas

2.3 Diagnostics

2.3.1 Internal VP modification

2.3.2 Intervening verbal morphology

2.3.3 Agentive modification under make

2.3.4 Intervening high applicative morphology

2.3.5 Causatives of unergatives and transitives

2.3.6 Unaccusative causatives

2.4 Summary

3. VoiceP is a phase

3.1 Passives contain VoiceP

3.2 Actives contain VoiceP: Evidence from ellipsis

3.3 The complement of make

3.5 Summary

4. Passive causatives with make

4.1 Passive make

4.2 A preliminary analysis

4.3 The nature of to in passive causatives

4.3.1 Hornstein et al. (2006)

4.3.2 Santorini &amp

Heycock (1988) and Higginbotham (1983).

4.4 The role of T(ense) features in Agree relations: Pesetsky &amp

Torrego

4.4.1 The auxiliary do is an instance of T in C

4.4.2 That is an instance of T in C

4.4.3 Two types of T

4.5 to is an instance of T0 raised to Voice

4.5.1 Asymmetries in passive causatives

4.5.2 Voice contains a uT feature

4.5.3 To is an instance of valued T on Voice

4.5.4 The valuation of uT on Voice by matrix T

4.5.5 The valuation of uT on Voice by matrix To

4.5.6 The valuation of uT on Voice by embedded To

4.5.7 Extending the proposal to other structures

4.6 Summary

4.7 Passive causatives without Voice

4.8 Cause to

5. Summary and conclusion

Productive causatives

2. Hiaki productive causatives: The data

2.1 Morphological causatives

2.2 Types of verbs embedded by productive causatives

2.3 The arguments of Hiaki productive causatives

2.3.1 A contrast between -tua and -tevo

2.3.2 The causee argument

2.3.2.1 tua requires an explicit causee

2.3.2.2 tevo generally disallows an explicit causee

3. The direct causative -tua

3.1 Productive -tua

3.1.1 Productive -tua selects VoiceP

3.1.2 Is -tua phase selecting?

3.1.3 Direct causative -tua is non Voice-bundling

3.1.4 tua disallows passive complements

3.1.5 Summary

3.2 Other uses of productive -tua

3.2.1 Pretend

3.2.2 Let

3.2.3 Analysis

3.3 Nominal and Root complements of tua

3.3.1 Nominal complements of -tua

3.3.2 Root complements of -tua

3.3.3 Analysis

3.4 Two layers of -tua

3.4.1 The argument structure

3.4.2 A morphological restriction: Haplology

3.4.3 Analysis

3.5 Lexical -tua embedded by -tevo

3.6 Summary

4. The syntax of -tevo

4.1 tevo disallows embedded subjects (causees)

4.2 tevo: An analysis

4.2.1 tevo is non-Voice-bundling.

4.2.2 tevo is verb-selecting

4.3 No causee embedded under -tevo: Evidence

4.3.1 Subjects of causativized passives

4.3.2 Number agreement and suppletive verbs

5. The -tua-tevo causative

5.1 The embedded subject in -tua-tevo combinations

5.2 In support of verb-selecting -tevo/non-Voice-bundling -tua

6. Indirect causatives with seemingly overt causees

6.1 tevo: An apparent optionality

6.2 Internal arguments of 'arrive' in -tevo causatives

7. Conclusion

Spanish productive causatives

2. Syntactic properties of hacer

2.1 FI versus FQ

2.2 The complement of FI versus the complement of FQ

2.2.1 Unergative, transitive and unaccusative complements of hacer

2.2.2 FI is more restricted than FQ

2.3 FI versus FP

2.4 Non-verbal complements of hacer

2.5 Unaccusative hacer

3. Hacer may be functional or lexical

3.1 Italian fare: Folli &amp

Harley (2003, 2007)

3.2 Lexical hacer: The FP construction

3.2.1 hacer in FP is VºDO

3.2.2 Passives of causatives

3.2.3 Restructuring and FP

3.3 Functional hacer: FQ

4. Spanish FI

4.1 Proposal

4.2 Some previous accounts

4.2.1 Treviño (1994)

4.2.2 Recent proposals

4.3 FI in Italian: Folli &amp

4.3.1 Basic analysis

4.3.2 The dative causee

4.4 Spanish applicatives

4.4.1 Cuervo's (2003) affected applicative

4.4.2 Productive hacer and applicative causees

4.4.3 Datives with FQ

4.5 The animacy of the causee

4.6 The clitic doubling of the dative causee

4.7 Agent-oriented verbal modifiers

4.8 External arguments and depictives

4.9 FI does not allow agentless complements

4.10 The dative causee may be a derived subject

4.11 Summary

5. FN: Hacer with non-verbal complements

6. Unaccusative hacer.

6.1 Finite CP within unaccusative hacer

6.2 The matrix verb exhibits default (3s) agreement

6.3 Only datives are allowed in the desiderative construction

6.4. Hacer in weather/time constructions

6.5 Other instances of hacer with no external argument

Concluding remarks

References

Index.

Notes:

Bibliographic Level Mode of Issuance: Monograph

Includes bibliographical references and index.

ISBN:

9786613174857

9781283174855

1283174855

9789027286598

9027286590

OCLC:

746897791