Discrete Entailment-Based Linking and -EE Nouns in English
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2478/v10015-007-0002-6Keywords:
argument structure, benefactee, dative overriding, linking theory, malefactee, macroroles, Proto-Roles, theta-roles, unaccusativityAbstract
Barker (1998) argues that since the referent of an -ee noun can be an indirect object, a direct object, a prepositional object, or a subject, -ee nouns cannot be described as a syntactic natural class. Portero Muñoz (2003) concurs and offers a semantic analysis based on Logical Structure (LS) in the framework of Role and Reference Grammar (RRG). This article proposes that RRG’s macroroles (Actor and Undergoer) can be derived with two entailments and without any need for LS. Its analysis improves Portero Muñoz’s, presenting additional evidence that subjects that allow -ee noun formation are Undergoers. It also explains why most -ee nouns are direct objects in spite of the fact that the suffi Xoriginated as a referent for indirect objects. Finally, it offers an explanation for nouns like amputee, pluckee, twistee, benefactee, malefactee, biographee, catapultee, razee, standee, attendee.
References
Alonso, M. 1962. Evolución sintáctica del español. Sintaxis histórica del español desde el iberorromano hasta nuestros días. Madrid: Aguilar.
Google Scholar
Alsina, A. 1996. The Role of Argument Structure in Grammar. Evidence from Romance. Stanford: CSLI Lectures Notes ć 62.
Google Scholar
Barker, C. 1998. ‘‘Episodic -ee in English: A thematic role constraint on new word formation’’. Language 64, 695–727.
Google Scholar
Bauer, L. 1987. ‘‘-Ee by gum!’’ American Speech 62, 315–329.
Google Scholar
Bengtsson, E. 1927. Studies on Passive Nouns with a Concrete Sense. Lund: Hakan Ohlsson.
Google Scholar
Blake, B. J. 2001. Case. New York: Cambridge UP.
Google Scholar
Bresnan, J. 1982. The Mental Representation of Grammatical Relations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Google Scholar
Bresnan, J. (ed.). 1982. ‘‘The passive in lexical theory’’. In: Bresnan J. (ed.), 3–86.
Google Scholar
Burzio, L. 1986. Italian Syntax: A Government-Binding Approach. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Google Scholar
Croft, W. 1993. ‘‘Case marking and the semantics of mental verbs’’. In: Pustejovsky J. (ed.), 55–72.
Google Scholar
Culicover, P. et al. 1977. Formal Syntax. New York: Academic Press.
Google Scholar
Davis, A. R. 2001. Linking by Types in the Hierarchical Lexicon. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
Google Scholar
Delbecque, N. and B. Lamiroy. 1996. ‘‘Towards a typology of the Spanish dative’’. In: W. van Belle and B. Van Langendonck (eds), 71–117.
Google Scholar
Dowty, D. 1991. ‘‘Thematic proto-roles and argument selection’’. Language 67, 547–619.
Google Scholar
Draye, L. 1996. ‘‘The German dative’’. In: van Belle W. and W. van Langendonck (eds), 155–215.
Google Scholar
Dressman, M. R. 1994. ‘‘The suffix -ee’’. In: Little G. D. and M. Montgomery (eds), 155–161.
Google Scholar
Farrell, P. 1994. Grammatical Relations and Thematic Roles. New York: Garland.
Google Scholar
Farrell, P. 2001. ‘‘Functional shift as category underspecification’’. English Language and Linguistics 5, 109–130.
Google Scholar
Fernández Ramírez, S. 1987. Gramática española. El pronombre. Vol. prepared J. Polo. Madrid: Arco/libros, S.A.
Google Scholar
Foley, W. A. and R. D. van Valin, Jr., 1984. Functional Syntax and Universal Grammar. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UP.
Google Scholar
García, E. 1975. The Role of Theory in Linguistic Analysis. Amsterdam: North Holland.
Google Scholar
Gili y Gaya, S. 1961. Curso superior de sintaxis española. Barcelona: Spes S.A.
Google Scholar
Givón, T. 1997. ‘‘Grammatical relations: An introduction’’. In: Givón T. (ed), 1–84.
Google Scholar
Givón, T. 1997. Grammatical Relations. A Functionalist Perspective. Typological Studies in Language 35. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Google Scholar
González, L. 1998. ‘‘Dative/accusative alternations in gustar-type verbs’’. Spanish Applied Linguistics 2, 137–167.
Google Scholar
González, L. 2005a. ‘‘On the difference between washing machines and waiting lists’’. Hispania 88, 190–200.
Google Scholar
González, L. 2005b. ‘‘Entailment-based linking theory and some implications for universal language’’. Journal of Universal Language 6, 29–63.
Google Scholar
Grimshaw, J. 1982. ‘‘On the lexical representation of Romance reflexive clitics’’. In: Bresnan J. (ed), 87–148.
Google Scholar
Grimshaw, J. 1990. Argument Structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Google Scholar
Gruber, J. S. 1976. Lexical Structures in Syntax and Semantics. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Google Scholar
Heinz, W. and J. Matiasek 1994. ‘‘Argument structure and case assignment in German’’. In: J. Nerbonne et al. (eds), 199–236.
Google Scholar
Harris, A. 1984. ‘‘Inversion as a rule of universal grammar: Georgian evidence’’. In: Perlmutter D. M. and C. Rosen (eds), 259–291.
Google Scholar
Horn, L. R. 1980. ‘‘Affixation and the unaccusative hypothesis’’. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society 16, 134–146.
Google Scholar
Huddleston, R. D. and G. K. Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
Google Scholar
Jespersen, O. 1923. Growth and Structure of the English Language. New York: D. Appleton & Co.
Google Scholar
Jespersen, O. 1933. Essentials of English Grammar. New York: Holt.
Google Scholar
Kayne, R. 1975. French Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Google Scholar
Keyser, S. J. and T. Roeper. 1984. ‘‘On the middle and ergative constructions in English’’. Linguistics Inquiry 15, 381–416.
Google Scholar
Kishimoto, H. 1996. ‘‘Split intransitivity in Japanese and the unaccusative hypothesis’’. Language 72, 248–286.
Google Scholar
Kuno, S. 1973. The Structure of the Japanese Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Google Scholar
Lamiroy, B. and N. Delbecque. 1998. ‘‘The possessive dative in Romance and Germanic languages’’. In: van Langendonck W. and W. van Belle (eds), 29–74.
Google Scholar
Lapesa, R. 1983. Historia de la lengua española. Madrid: Editorial Gredos.
Google Scholar
Legendre, G. 1989. ‘‘Unaccusativity in French’’. Lingua 79, 95–164.
Google Scholar
Levin, B. and M. Rappaport. 1988. ‘‘Non-event -er nominals: A probe into argument structure’’. Linguistics 26, 1067–1083.
Google Scholar
Levin, B. and M. Rappaport Hovav1995 [1999]. Unaccusativity. At the Syntax-lexical Semantics Interface. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Google Scholar
Little, G. D. and M. Montgomery (eds), 1994. Centennial Usage Studies, 78. Tuscaloosa and London: Alabama UP.
Google Scholar
Marantz, A. 1984. On the Nature of Grammatical Relations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Google Scholar
Marchand, H. 1960. The Categories and Types of Present-day English Word-formation. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.
Google Scholar
Marcos Marín, F. 1978. Estudios sobre el pronombre. Madrid: Gredos.
Google Scholar
Merriam-Webster Dictionary 2002. Online. http://www.m-w.com
Google Scholar
Moore, J. C. 1996. Reduced Constructions in Spanish. New York: Garland.
Google Scholar
Nerbonne, J. et al. 1994. German in Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
Google Scholar
Perlmutter, D. M. 1978. ‘‘Impersonal passives and the unaccusative hypothesis’’. Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. Berkeley: California UP.
Google Scholar
Perlmutter, D. M. 1984. ‘‘Working 1s and inversion in Italian, Japanese, and Quechua’’. In: Perlmutter D. M. and C. Rosen (eds), 292–330.
Google Scholar
Perlmutter, D. M. and C. Rosen 1984. Studies in Relational Grammar 2. Chicago: Chicago UP.
Google Scholar
Portero Muñoz, C. 2003. ‘‘Derived nominalizations in -ee: a Role and Reference Grammar based semantic analysis’’. English Language and Linguistics 7, 129–159.
Google Scholar
Pustejovsky, J. (ed). 1993. Semantics and the Lexicon. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Google Scholar
Rappaport Hovav, M. and B. Levin, 1992. ‘‘-Er nominals: Implications for the theory of argument structure’’. In: Stowel T. and E. Wehrli (eds), 127–153.
Google Scholar
Real Academia Española (RAE). 1985. Esbozo de una nueva gramática de la lengua española. 10th reprinting. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe.
Google Scholar
Rosen, C. 1984. ‘‘The interface between semantic roles and initial grammatical relations’’. In: Perlmutter D. M. and C. Rosen (eds), 38–77.
Google Scholar
Rydén, M. and S. Brorström. 1987. The Be/Have Variation with Intransitives in English: With Special Reference to the Late Modern Period. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.
Google Scholar
Ryder, M. E. 1999. ‘‘Bankers and blue-chippers: an account of -er formation in present-day English’’. English Language and Linguistics 3, 269–297.
Google Scholar
Safire, W. 1982. ‘‘What is the good word?’’ New York: Times Books, 63–64.
Google Scholar
Shibatani, M. 1976. ‘‘Causativization’’. In: Shibatani M. (ed), 239–293.
Google Scholar
Shibatani, M. (ed). 1976. Sintax and Semantics, Vol. 5: Japanese Generative Grammar. New York: Academic Press, 239–293.
Google Scholar
Somers, H. L. 1984. ‘‘On the validity of the complement-adjunct distinction in valency grammar’’. Linguistics 22, 507–530.
Google Scholar
Stowel, T. and E. Wehrli (eds). 1992. Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 26: Syntax and the Lexicon. San Diego: Academic Press.
Google Scholar
van Belle, W. and W. van Langendonck (eds). 1996. The Dative. Vol. 1. Descriptive Studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Google Scholar
van Hoecke, W. 1996. ‘‘The Latin dative’’. In: van Belle W. and W. van Langendonck (eds), 3–37.
Google Scholar
van Langendonck, W. and W. van Belle (eds). 1998. The dative. Vol. 2. Theoretical and Contrastive Studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Google Scholar
van Valin, R. D., Jr. 1990. ‘‘Semantic parameters of split intransitivity’’. Language 66, 221–260.
Google Scholar
van Valin, R. D., Jr. and R. J. LaPolla. 1997. Syntax. Structure, Meaning and Function. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UP.
Google Scholar
Wasow, T. 1977. ‘‘Transformations and the Lexicon’’. In: Culicover P. et al. (eds), 327–360.
Google Scholar
Wechsler, S. 1995. The Semantic Basis of Argument Structure. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
Google Scholar
Whitley, S. 2002. Spanish/English Contrasts. Washington: Georgetown UP.
Google Scholar
Zamora Vicente, A. 1960. Dialectología española. Madrid: Gredos.
Google Scholar
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
