On the licensing of causatives of directed motion: Waltzing matilda all over

Studia Linguistica

Volumn 60, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 121-155

  Folli, Raffaella ^a   Harley, Heidi ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ULSTER   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33845408910     PISSN: 00393193     EISSN: 14679582     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9582.2006.00135.x     Document Type: Article

References (74)

1. ABUSCH, D. 1985. On Verbs and Time. University of Massachusetts, Amherst. PhD diss.
2. ABUSCH, D. 1986. Verbs of change, causation and time. Report, CSLI: 86-50. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
3. ARAD, M. 1998. Are unaccusatives aspectually characterized? (And other related questions). Cambridge, MA: MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 32. 1-20.
4. ASKE, J. 1989. Path predicates in English and Spanish: A closer look. Proceedings of the 15th annual Berkeley Linguistics Society Meeting. 1-14.
5. BEAVERS, J. 2002. Aspect and the distribution of prepositional resultative phrases in English. LinGO Working Paper No. 2002-07. 1-39. Stanford: CSLI.
6. BORER, H. 1998. Deriving passives without theta-grids. Morphology and its relations to phonology and syntax. eds. S. Lapointe, D. Brentary & D. Farrell, 60-99. Stanford: CSLI.
7. BORER, H. 2004. The grammar machine. The Unaccusativity Puzzle. ed. A. Alexiadou, E. Anagnastopoulou & M. Everaert. Oxford: OUP.
8. BORER, H. 2005. Structuring sense, Volume II: The normal course of events. Oxford: OUP.
9. BURZIO, L. 1986. Italian syntax: a Government and Binding approach. Dordrecht: Reidel.
10. CHOMSKY, N. 1981. Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.
11. CROFT, W. A. 1991. Syntactic categories and grammatical relations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
12. CRUSE, D. A. 1972. A note on English causatives. Linguistic Inquiry 3: 522-28.
13. DI SCIULLO, A. M. & WILLIAMS, E. 1987. On the definition of word. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
14. DOWTY, D. 1979. Word meaning and Montague Grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel.
15. DOWTY, D. 1991. Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67: 547-619.
16. FINKBEINER, M. & NICOL, J. L. 2003. Semantic category effects in L2 word learning. Applied Psycholinguistics 24: 369-383.
17. FOLLI, R. 2001. Constructing telicity in English and Italian. University of Oxford. PhD diss.
18. FOLLI, R. & HARLEY, H. 2004. Flavors of v: Consuming results in Italian and English. Aspectual Inquiries. eds. R. Slabakova & P. Kempchinsky, 95-120. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
19. FOLLI, R., & RAMCHAND, G. 2001. Getting results: motion constructions in Italian and Scottish Gaelic. Proceedings of WCCFL 20. eds. K. Megerdoomian & L.A. Bar-el, 101-114. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
20. FOLLI, R. & RAMCHAND, G. 2005. Prepositions and results in Italian and English: An analysis from event decomposition. Perspectives on Aspect, eds. H. Verkuyl, A. van Hout & H. deSwart. Dordrecht: Springer.
21. HALE, K. & KEYSER, S. J. 1993. On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations. The view from Building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvian Bromberger. eds. K. Hale & S. J. Keyser, 53-109. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
22. HAY, J., KENNEDY, C. & LEVIN, B. 1999. Scalar structure underlies telicity in 'degree achievements'. Proceedings of SALT IX. eds. T. Mathews & D. Strolovitch, 127-144. Ithaca: CLC Publications.
23. HIGGINBOTHAM, J. 1997. Location and causation. University of Oxford. Ms.
24. HIGGINBOTHAM J. 2000. Accomplishments. Proceedings of Glow in Asia II. 72-82. Nagoya: Nanzan University.
25. VAN HOUT, A. 1996. Event semantics of verb frame alternations. TILDIL Dissertation Series.
26. VAN HOUT, A. 2004. Unaccusativity as telicity checking. The Unaccusativity Puzzle, eds. A. Alexiadou, E. Anagnastopoulou & M. Everaert. Oxford: OUP.
27. VAN RIEMSDIJK, H. 2002. The unbearable lightness of GOing. The projection parameter as a pure parameter governing the distribution of elliptic motion verbs in Germanic. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 5: 143-196.
28. HOEKSTRA, T. 1984. Transitivity: grammatical relations in Government and Binding theory. Dordrecht: Foris.
29. HOEKSTRA, T. & MULDER, J. 1990. Unergatives as copular verbs. The Linguistic Review 7: 1-79.
30. JACKENDOFF, R. 1972. Semantic interpretation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
31. JACKENDOFF, R. 1990. Semantic structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
32. KAYNE, R. 1985. Principles of particle constructions. Levels of syntactic representation, eds. Obenauer H. et al., 101-140. Amsterdam: Foris.
33. KENNY, A. 1963. Action, emotion and will. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
34. KENNEDY, C. & MCNALLY, L. 2005. Scale structure, degree modification and the semantics of gradable predicates. To appear in Language.
35. KIPARSKY, P. 1998. Partitive case and aspect. The projection of arguments: Lexical and compositional factors. eds. W. Gender & M. Butt, 265-307. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
36. KRATZER, A. 1996. Severing the external argument from its verb. Phrase structure and the lexicon, eds. J. Roorych & L. Zaring, 109-137. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
37. KRIFKA, M. 1992. Thematic relations as links between nominal reference and temporal constitution. Lexical matters, eds. I. Sag & A. Szabolsci, 29-53. Stanford: CSLI.
38. KRIFKA, M., PELLETIER, F. J., CARLSON, G. N., TER MEULEN, A., LINK, G. & CHIERCHIA, G. 1995. Genericity: An introduction. The Generic Book. eds. G. N. Carlson & F. J. Pelletier, 1-124. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
39. KRIFKA, M. 1998. The origins of telicity. Events and grammar, ed. S. Rothstein, 197-236. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
40. LEVIN, B. & RAPPAPORT-HOVAV, M. 1995. Unaccusativity: At the syntax-lexical semantics interface. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
41. LEVIN, B. & RAPPAPORT-HOVAV, M. 1999. Two structures for compositionally derived events. Proceedings of SALT 9, 199-223. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Linguistics Circle Publications, Cornell University.
42. MATEU, J. 2001. Syntactically-based lexical decomposition: the case of climb revisited. Paper presented at the 26th meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society.
43. MARANTZ, A. 1997. No escape from syntax: don't try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 4.2. eds. A. Dimitriadis & L. Siegel, 201-225.
44. NAPOLI, D. J. 1992. Secondary resultative predicates in Italian. Journal of Linguistics 28, 53-90.
45. NEELEMAN, A. 1994. Complex predicates. University of Utrecht. PhD diss.
46. PAPAFRAGOU, A., MASSEY, C. & GLEITMAN, L. 2002. Shake, rattle and roll: The representation of motion in language and cognition. Cognition 84: 189-218.
47. PESETSKY, D. 1987. Wh-in-situ: Movement and unselective binding. The representation of (in) definiteness. eds. E. Reuland & A. ter Meulen, 98-129. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
48. PUSTEJOVSKY, J. 1991. The syntax of event structure. Cognition 41. 47-81.
49. PUSTEJOVSKY, J. (ed). 1993. Semantics and the lexicon. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
50. RAMCHAND, G. 2001. L-syntax, selection and semantics. University of Oxford. Ms.
51. RAMCHAND, G. & SVENONIUS, P. 2002. Lexical syntax and lexical semantics of verb-particle constructions. Proceedings of WCCFL 21. eds. L. Mikkelsen & C. Potts, 101-114. Somerville MA: Cascadilla.
52. REINHART, T. 1991. Lexical properties of ergativity. Paper presented at the Workshop on Lexical Specification and Lexical Insertion, Research Institute for Language and Speech, University of Utrecht.
53. RITTER, E., & ROSEN, S. T. 1998. Delimiting events in syntax. The projection of arguments, eds. M. Butt & Geuder W., 135-164. Stanford: CSLI.
54. RIZZI, L. 1982. Issues in Italian syntax. Dordrecht: Foris.
55. SCHEIN, B. 1999. Events and the semantic content of thematic relations. University of Southern California. Ms.
56. SLOBIN, D. 1996. Two ways to travel: Verbs of motion in English and Spanish. Grammatical constructions: Their form and meaning. eds. M. S. Shibatani & S. A. Thompson, 195-220. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
57. SNYDER, W. & STROMSWOLD, K. 1997. The structure and acquisition of the English dative construction. Linguistic Inquiry 28: 281-317.
58. STOWELL, T. 1983. Subject across categories. The Linguistic Review 2: 285-312.
59. SVENONIUS, P. 2002. Case is uninterpretable aspect. Proceedings of the Perspectives on Aspect Workshop. Available online at: http://www-uilots.let.uu. nl/conferences/Perspectives_on_Aspect/P_o_A_procpapers.html
60. SVENONIUS, P. 2004. Spatial P in English. University of Tromsø. Ms.
61. TALMY, L. 1975. Semantics and syntax of motion. Syntax and Semantics (Vol. 4). ed. J. P. Kimball, 181-238. New York: Academic Press.
62. TALMY, L. 1985. Lexicalization patterns: semantic structure in lexical forms. Language typology and syntactic description III: grammatical categories and the lexicon, ed. T. Shopen, 57-149. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
63. TALMY, L. 1991. Path to realisation: a typology of event integration. Buffalo Papers in Linguistics 91: 147-187.
64. TENNY, C. 1987. Grammaticalizing aspect and affectedness. MIT. PhD diss.
65. TENNY, C. 1994. Aspectual roles and the syntax-semantics interface. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
66. TRAVIS, L. 2000. Event structure in syntax. Events as grammatical objects. eds. C. Tenny & J. Pustejovsky, 145-185. Stanford: CSLI.
67. TUNGSETH, M. 2004. PP, PathP and the telic/atelic distinction in Norwegian motion constructions. Aspectual inquiries. eds. R. Slabakova & P. Kempchinsky. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
68. VAN VALIN R. D., Jr., 1990. Semantic parameters of split intransitivity. Language 66, 221-60.
69. VAN VALIN, R. D. & LAPOLLA, R. J. 1997. Syntax: Structure, meaning and function. Cambridge: Cambridge Univerisity Press.
70. VENDLER, Z. 1967. Predication. Linguistic Inquiry 11: 203-238.
71. WECHSLER, S. 2001. An analysis of English resultatives under the event-argument homomorphism model of telicity. Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Text Structure. University of Texas, Austin, Oct. 13-15, 2000.
72. WECHSLER, S. 2005. Resultatives under the event-argument homomorphism model of telicity. The syntax of aspect. eds. N. Erteschik-Shir & T. Rapoport. Oxford: OUP.
73. ZUBIZARRETA, M. L. 1987. Levels of representation in the lexicon and in the syntax. Dordrecht: Foris.
74. ZUBIZARRETA, M. L. & OH, E. 2004. The lexicon-syntax interface: The case of motion verbs. University of Southern California. Ms.