Retail price
CHF** SFr.86.95EURD** €81.95EURA** €81.95EUR* €68.95GBP* £54.95USD* $88.95
Show Less
Redeem Token
Restricted access
Applicative Arguments
A Syntactic and Semantic Investigation of German and English
Series:
Solveig Bosse
Applicative Arguments: A Syntactic and Semantic Investigation of German and English presents formal semantic and syntactic analyses of German and English applicative arguments. These arguments are nominal elements that are not obligatory parts of a sentence. Both German and English have several types of applicative arguments, including so-called benefactive and malefactive constructions. More specifically, the research relies on tests to differentiate the different types of applicative arguments based on this contribution to meaning: Some applicatives contribute only not-at-issue meaning, whereas others contribute only at-issue meaning, and still others contribute both types of meaning. These tests are applied to both German and English to uniquely identify the applicative arguments in each language. Formal analyses of the identified type of applicative arguments are presented that provide an account for each type of applicative identified for each language, explaining the applicatives’ differences and similarities.
Book (EPUB)
- ISBN:
- 978-1-4541-9426-2
- Availability:
- Available
- Subjects:
Prices
Currency depends on your shipping address
- New York, Bern, Berlin, Bruxelles, Frankfurt am Main, Oxford, Wien, 2015. 246 pp.
Show Summary Details
Redeem Token
- Cover
- Title
- Copyright
- About the author
- About the book
- This eBook can be cited
- Acknowledgments
- Contents
- 1.1 Defining Applicative Arguments
- 1.2 Goals and Structure of this Book
- 2.1 Introduction
- 2.2 Not-At-Issue Meaning
- 2.3 Event Semantics
- 2.4 Pylkkänen (2002, 2008)
- 3.1 Introduction
- 3.2.1 Benefactives (Chapter 5)
- 3.2.2 Part-Whole Applicative Arguments (Chapter 6) & Pertinence Datives
- 3.2.3 Other German Applicatives
- 3.3.1 Affected Experiencers
- 3.3.2 Pertinence Dative
- 3.4 Analysis
- 3.5.1 Bi-Eventivity
- 3.5.2 Again-Modification
- 3.5.3 Negation
- 3.6.1 Analysis
- 3.6.2.1 Binding Hole (2005; 2008; 201X) presents a binding approach to pertinence datives.
- 3.6.2.2 Possessor Raising
- 3.6.3 Conclusion
- 3.7.1 Valency
- 3.7.2 Semantic Licensing
- 3.8 Affected Experiencers following Potts (2005)
- 3.9.1 Japanese: Attachment Height Variation
- 3.9.2.1 Not-At-Issue Meaning
- 3.9.2.2 Analysis
- 3.9.3 Parametric Variation
- 3.10 Conclusion
- 4.1 Introduction
- 4.2.1.1 Distribution
- 4.2.1.2 Not-at-issue Meaning
- 4.2.2.1 Previous Analyses
- 4.2.2.2 Analysis
- 4.2.3 Summary
- 4.3.1 Description
- 4.3.2 Features
- 4.3.3 Form
- 4.3.4 Role of the Direct Object
- 4.3.5 Not-At-Issue Meaning
- 4.3.6 Analysis
- 4.3.7 Consequences
- 4.3.8.1 Haddad (2011)
- 4.3.8.2 Hutchinson and Armstrong (2013)
- 4.3.9 Summary
- 4.4 Not-At-Issue Applicatives
- 4.5 Conclusion
- 5.1 Introduction
- 5.2.1 English
- 5.2.2 German
- 5.3 At-Issue Content
- 5.4.1 Analysis
- 5.4.2 Consequences
- 5.4.3 Verbal Restrictions
- 5.4.4 Hole (2005; 201X)
- 5.4.5 Summary
- 5.5.1 Meaning
- 5.5.2 Ditransitives and Benefactives
- 5.5.3 Analysis
- 5.5.4 Consequences
- 5.5.5 Summary
- 5.6.1 Analysis
- 5.6.2 Consequences
- 5.6.3 PP-shells
- 5.7 Conclusion
- 6.1 Introduction
- 6.2.1 Differentiating Part-Whole Applicative Arguments
- 6.2.2 Characteristics
- 6.2.3 Restrictions on Part-Whole Applicative Arguments
- 6.3 At-Issue Meaning
- 6.4.1 Possessor Raising
- 6.4.2 Pylkkänen (2002)
- 6.4.3 Hole (2008)
- 6.4.4 Tomioka and Sim (2007)
- 6.4.5 Analysis
- 6.5 Consequences
- 6.6 Conclusion
- 7.1 Introduction
- 7.2 Description
- 7.3 At-Issue Meaning
- 7.4 Analysis
- 7.5 Consequences
- 7.6 Conclusion
- 8.1 Introduction
- 8.2.1 Ethical Dative
- 8.2.2 Dative of Inaction
- 8.2.3 Subject Co-referential Applicative
- 8.2.4 Affected Experiencer
- 8.2.5 True Benefactive
- 8.2.6 Part-Whole Applicative
- 8.2.7 Summary
- 8.3 English
- 8.4 Conclusion
- 9 Conclusion
- Appendix 1: Affected Experiencers
- Appendix 2: Not-At-Issue Applicatives
- Appendix 3: Benefactives
- Appendix 4: Part-Whole Applicative
- Appendix 5: Dative of Inaction
- Glossary
- Bibliography
- Index
- Series index
- Cover
- Title
- Copyright
- About the author
- About the book
- This eBook can be cited
- Acknowledgments
- Contents
- 1.1 Defining Applicative Arguments
- 1.2 Goals and Structure of this Book
- 2.1 Introduction
- 2.2 Not-At-Issue Meaning
- 2.3 Event Semantics
- 2.4 Pylkkänen (2002, 2008)
- 3.1 Introduction
- 3.2.1 Benefactives (Chapter 5)
- 3.2.2 Part-Whole Applicative Arguments (Chapter 6) & Pertinence Datives
- 3.2.3 Other German Applicatives
- 3.3.1 Affected Experiencers
- 3.3.2 Pertinence Dative
- 3.4 Analysis
- 3.5.1 Bi-Eventivity
- 3.5.2 Again-Modification
- 3.5.3 Negation
- 3.6.1 Analysis
- 3.6.2.1 Binding Hole (2005; 2008; 201X) presents a binding approach to pertinence datives.
- 3.6.2.2 Possessor Raising
- 3.6.3 Conclusion
- 3.7.1 Valency
- 3.7.2 Semantic Licensing
- 3.8 Affected Experiencers following Potts (2005)
- 3.9.1 Japanese: Attachment Height Variation
- 3.9.2.1 Not-At-Issue Meaning
- 3.9.2.2 Analysis
- 3.9.3 Parametric Variation
- 3.10 Conclusion
- 4.1 Introduction
- 4.2.1.1 Distribution
- 4.2.1.2 Not-at-issue Meaning
- 4.2.2.1 Previous Analyses
- 4.2.2.2 Analysis
- 4.2.3 Summary
- 4.3.1 Description
- 4.3.2 Features
- 4.3.3 Form
- 4.3.4 Role of the Direct Object
- 4.3.5 Not-At-Issue Meaning
- 4.3.6 Analysis
- 4.3.7 Consequences
- 4.3.8.1 Haddad (2011)
- 4.3.8.2 Hutchinson and Armstrong (2013)
- 4.3.9 Summary
- 4.4 Not-At-Issue Applicatives
- 4.5 Conclusion
- 5.1 Introduction
- 5.2.1 English
- 5.2.2 German
- 5.3 At-Issue Content
- 5.4.1 Analysis
- 5.4.2 Consequences
- 5.4.3 Verbal Restrictions
- 5.4.4 Hole (2005; 201X)
- 5.4.5 Summary
- 5.5.1 Meaning
- 5.5.2 Ditransitives and Benefactives
- 5.5.3 Analysis
- 5.5.4 Consequences
- 5.5.5 Summary
- 5.6.1 Analysis
- 5.6.2 Consequences
- 5.6.3 PP-shells
- 5.7 Conclusion
- 6.1 Introduction
- 6.2.1 Differentiating Part-Whole Applicative Arguments
- 6.2.2 Characteristics
- 6.2.3 Restrictions on Part-Whole Applicative Arguments
- 6.3 At-Issue Meaning
- 6.4.1 Possessor Raising
- 6.4.2 Pylkkänen (2002)
- 6.4.3 Hole (2008)
- 6.4.4 Tomioka and Sim (2007)
- 6.4.5 Analysis
- 6.5 Consequences
- 6.6 Conclusion
- 7.1 Introduction
- 7.2 Description
- 7.3 At-Issue Meaning
- 7.4 Analysis
- 7.5 Consequences
- 7.6 Conclusion
- 8.1 Introduction
- 8.2.1 Ethical Dative
- 8.2.2 Dative of Inaction
- 8.2.3 Subject Co-referential Applicative
- 8.2.4 Affected Experiencer
- 8.2.5 True Benefactive
- 8.2.6 Part-Whole Applicative
- 8.2.7 Summary
- 8.3 English
- 8.4 Conclusion
- 9 Conclusion
- Appendix 1: Affected Experiencers
- Appendix 2: Not-At-Issue Applicatives
- Appendix 3: Benefactives
- Appendix 4: Part-Whole Applicative
- Appendix 5: Dative of Inaction
- Glossary
- Bibliography
- Index
- Series index
Restricted access
7 Dative of Inaction
Chapter
- Subjects:
Prices
Chapter Price
CHF** SFr.35.00EURD** €36.00EURA** €36.00EUR* €30.00GBP* £23.00USD* $42.00
Currency depends on your shipping address
Extract
7.1 Introduction
In this chapter, I discuss the last type of German applicative arguments, namely the Dative of Inaction (DI):99
Though Hens gives the translation of the DI with “on grandma” in (358), a better translation would be “on grandma’s watch” or “Grandma let the vase break”. This translation avoids ambiguity with the affected experiencer in the English translation, and it reflects the meaning of the DI better because it indicates that the grandma was in some way in charge of the vase and could have prevented its breaking. This is the meaning of the DI in (358).100 Following Hens (1997) and Rosengren (1975), I argue that the Dative of Inaction needs to be distinguished from other applicative arguments because of its semantic contribution and its limited occurrence.
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.
Do you have any questions? Contact us.
Or login to access all content.- Cover
- Title
- Copyright
- About the author
- About the book
- This eBook can be cited
- Acknowledgments
- Contents
- 1.1 Defining Applicative Arguments
- 1.2 Goals and Structure of this Book
- 2.1 Introduction
- 2.2 Not-At-Issue Meaning
- 2.3 Event Semantics
- 2.4 Pylkkänen (2002, 2008)
- 3.1 Introduction
- 3.2.1 Benefactives (Chapter 5)
- 3.2.2 Part-Whole Applicative Arguments (Chapter 6) & Pertinence Datives
- 3.2.3 Other German Applicatives
- 3.3.1 Affected Experiencers
- 3.3.2 Pertinence Dative
- 3.4 Analysis
- 3.5.1 Bi-Eventivity
- 3.5.2 Again-Modification
- 3.5.3 Negation
- 3.6.1 Analysis
- 3.6.2.1 Binding Hole (2005; 2008; 201X) presents a binding approach to pertinence datives.
- 3.6.2.2 Possessor Raising
- 3.6.3 Conclusion
- 3.7.1 Valency
- 3.7.2 Semantic Licensing
- 3.8 Affected Experiencers following Potts (2005)
- 3.9.1 Japanese: Attachment Height Variation
- 3.9.2.1 Not-At-Issue Meaning
- 3.9.2.2 Analysis
- 3.9.3 Parametric Variation
- 3.10 Conclusion
- 4.1 Introduction
- 4.2.1.1 Distribution
- 4.2.1.2 Not-at-issue Meaning
- 4.2.2.1 Previous Analyses
- 4.2.2.2 Analysis
- 4.2.3 Summary
- 4.3.1 Description
- 4.3.2 Features
- 4.3.3 Form
- 4.3.4 Role of the Direct Object
- 4.3.5 Not-At-Issue Meaning
- 4.3.6 Analysis
- 4.3.7 Consequences
- 4.3.8.1 Haddad (2011)
- 4.3.8.2 Hutchinson and Armstrong (2013)
- 4.3.9 Summary
- 4.4 Not-At-Issue Applicatives
- 4.5 Conclusion
- 5.1 Introduction
- 5.2.1 English
- 5.2.2 German
- 5.3 At-Issue Content
- 5.4.1 Analysis
- 5.4.2 Consequences
- 5.4.3 Verbal Restrictions
- 5.4.4 Hole (2005; 201X)
- 5.4.5 Summary
- 5.5.1 Meaning
- 5.5.2 Ditransitives and Benefactives
- 5.5.3 Analysis
- 5.5.4 Consequences
- 5.5.5 Summary
- 5.6.1 Analysis
- 5.6.2 Consequences
- 5.6.3 PP-shells
- 5.7 Conclusion
- 6.1 Introduction
- 6.2.1 Differentiating Part-Whole Applicative Arguments
- 6.2.2 Characteristics
- 6.2.3 Restrictions on Part-Whole Applicative Arguments
- 6.3 At-Issue Meaning
- 6.4.1 Possessor Raising
- 6.4.2 Pylkkänen (2002)
- 6.4.3 Hole (2008)
- 6.4.4 Tomioka and Sim (2007)
- 6.4.5 Analysis
- 6.5 Consequences
- 6.6 Conclusion
- 7.1 Introduction
- 7.2 Description
- 7.3 At-Issue Meaning
- 7.4 Analysis
- 7.5 Consequences
- 7.6 Conclusion
- 8.1 Introduction
- 8.2.1 Ethical Dative
- 8.2.2 Dative of Inaction
- 8.2.3 Subject Co-referential Applicative
- 8.2.4 Affected Experiencer
- 8.2.5 True Benefactive
- 8.2.6 Part-Whole Applicative
- 8.2.7 Summary
- 8.3 English
- 8.4 Conclusion
- 9 Conclusion
- Appendix 1: Affected Experiencers
- Appendix 2: Not-At-Issue Applicatives
- Appendix 3: Benefactives
- Appendix 4: Part-Whole Applicative
- Appendix 5: Dative of Inaction
- Glossary
- Bibliography
- Index
- Series index
- Cover
- Title
- Copyright
- About the author
- About the book
- This eBook can be cited
- Acknowledgments
- Contents
- 1.1 Defining Applicative Arguments
- 1.2 Goals and Structure of this Book
- 2.1 Introduction
- 2.2 Not-At-Issue Meaning
- 2.3 Event Semantics
- 2.4 Pylkkänen (2002, 2008)
- 3.1 Introduction
- 3.2.1 Benefactives (Chapter 5)
- 3.2.2 Part-Whole Applicative Arguments (Chapter 6) & Pertinence Datives
- 3.2.3 Other German Applicatives
- 3.3.1 Affected Experiencers
- 3.3.2 Pertinence Dative
- 3.4 Analysis
- 3.5.1 Bi-Eventivity
- 3.5.2 Again-Modification
- 3.5.3 Negation
- 3.6.1 Analysis
- 3.6.2.1 Binding Hole (2005; 2008; 201X) presents a binding approach to pertinence datives.
- 3.6.2.2 Possessor Raising
- 3.6.3 Conclusion
- 3.7.1 Valency
- 3.7.2 Semantic Licensing
- 3.8 Affected Experiencers following Potts (2005)
- 3.9.1 Japanese: Attachment Height Variation
- 3.9.2.1 Not-At-Issue Meaning
- 3.9.2.2 Analysis
- 3.9.3 Parametric Variation
- 3.10 Conclusion
- 4.1 Introduction
- 4.2.1.1 Distribution
- 4.2.1.2 Not-at-issue Meaning
- 4.2.2.1 Previous Analyses
- 4.2.2.2 Analysis
- 4.2.3 Summary
- 4.3.1 Description
- 4.3.2 Features
- 4.3.3 Form
- 4.3.4 Role of the Direct Object
- 4.3.5 Not-At-Issue Meaning
- 4.3.6 Analysis
- 4.3.7 Consequences
- 4.3.8.1 Haddad (2011)
- 4.3.8.2 Hutchinson and Armstrong (2013)
- 4.3.9 Summary
- 4.4 Not-At-Issue Applicatives
- 4.5 Conclusion
- 5.1 Introduction
- 5.2.1 English
- 5.2.2 German
- 5.3 At-Issue Content
- 5.4.1 Analysis
- 5.4.2 Consequences
- 5.4.3 Verbal Restrictions
- 5.4.4 Hole (2005; 201X)
- 5.4.5 Summary
- 5.5.1 Meaning
- 5.5.2 Ditransitives and Benefactives
- 5.5.3 Analysis
- 5.5.4 Consequences
- 5.5.5 Summary
- 5.6.1 Analysis
- 5.6.2 Consequences
- 5.6.3 PP-shells
- 5.7 Conclusion
- 6.1 Introduction
- 6.2.1 Differentiating Part-Whole Applicative Arguments
- 6.2.2 Characteristics
- 6.2.3 Restrictions on Part-Whole Applicative Arguments
- 6.3 At-Issue Meaning
- 6.4.1 Possessor Raising
- 6.4.2 Pylkkänen (2002)
- 6.4.3 Hole (2008)
- 6.4.4 Tomioka and Sim (2007)
- 6.4.5 Analysis
- 6.5 Consequences
- 6.6 Conclusion
- 7.1 Introduction
- 7.2 Description
- 7.3 At-Issue Meaning
- 7.4 Analysis
- 7.5 Consequences
- 7.6 Conclusion
- 8.1 Introduction
- 8.2.1 Ethical Dative
- 8.2.2 Dative of Inaction
- 8.2.3 Subject Co-referential Applicative
- 8.2.4 Affected Experiencer
- 8.2.5 True Benefactive
- 8.2.6 Part-Whole Applicative
- 8.2.7 Summary
- 8.3 English
- 8.4 Conclusion
- 9 Conclusion
- Appendix 1: Affected Experiencers
- Appendix 2: Not-At-Issue Applicatives
- Appendix 3: Benefactives
- Appendix 4: Part-Whole Applicative
- Appendix 5: Dative of Inaction
- Glossary
- Bibliography
- Index
- Series index