@cite{krejci-2012} — Lexical Reflexivity and the Ingestive/Middle Class #
Krejci, Bonnie. 2012. The Event Structural Properties of the Transitive Alternation: A Cross-Linguistic Study. Master's Report, University of Texas at Austin.
Core claims #
Lexically reflexive verbs (eat, wash, dress, learn) have bieventive, causative event structure in their simple forms:
[[ACT(x)] CAUSE [BECOME ⟨STATE⟩ (x, y)]]with causer = causee. All four bieventivity diagnostics confirm this (§4.3–4.4).Two subtypes: middles (wash, dress) where the agent acts on their own body, and ingestives (eat, drink) where the agent acts on a consumed substance directed at themselves. Both are lexically reflexive.
learnis proposed as a "metaphorical ingestive" (§4.2.4).Four diagnostics — again ambiguity, re- prefixation, almost ambiguity, and negation over CAUSE — all detect bieventive structure in the simple forms of these verbs. All diagnostic data is for English.
Antireflexivization: the lexical causatives of these verbs (eat→feed, learn→teach) are derived by splitting the coidentified causer-causee argument into two distinct participants (§4.2).
The causativizability hierarchy — unaccusatives > middles/ingestives
unergatives > simple transitives — is validated across 12 languages (Table 2.8). This data is formalized in
MorphologicalCausation.krejciLanguages.
Bridges #
reflexive_is_bieventive→IntransitivizationType(central claim)eat_is_causativeResult→LevinClass.rootEntailments(root typology)eat_licenses_accomplishment→rootLicensesTemplate(ArgDerivation)eat_argTemplate_is_consumption→LevinClass.argTemplate(LevinClassProfiles)accomplishment_has_variant→Template.intransitiveVariantanticausative_no_theta/middle_no_theta→VoiceHead(Minimalist syntax)
Subtype of lexically reflexive verb (§4.1–4.2).
- middle : LexReflexiveSubtype
Middles: agent acts on own body (wash, dress). @cite{kemmer-1994}: one internally complex participant.
- ingestive : LexReflexiveSubtype
Ingestives: agent causes substance to enter self (eat, drink). Includes "metaphorical ingestives" (learn).
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
A lexically reflexive verb: a verb whose simple form has bieventive causative event structure with coidentified causer and causee.
The four bieventivity diagnostics (§4.3–4.4) test for complex internal structure — the presence of distinct sub-events connected by CAUSE that scopal modifiers can target independently:
- again: restitutive (result state restored) + repetitive (whole event repeated)
- re-: restitutive reading with re- prefix
- almost: scope over action sub-event vs. result sub-event
- negation over CAUSE: deny simple form while asserting causative variant
- gloss : String
- subtype : LexReflexiveSubtype
Lexical causative counterpart (antireflexivized form).
nonewhen the verb uses the same form transitively (wash, dress).- againAmbiguity : Bool
Does postverbal again produce restitutive + repetitive readings?
- rePrefixation : Bool
Does re- prefixation produce a restitutive reading?
- almostAmbiguity : Bool
Does almost produce scope ambiguity over sub-events?
- negationOverCause : Bool
Can the simple form be negated while asserting the causative variant?
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
- Phenomena.Causation.Studies.Krejci2012.instBEqLexReflexiveVerb.beq x✝¹ x✝ = false
Instances For
All diagnostic data is from English. @cite{krejci-2012} tests four verbs — eat, wash, dress, learn — each representing a subtype of the lexically reflexive class. All four pass all four diagnostics.
eat: ingestive. [[ACT⟨manipulate food⟩(x)] CAUSE [BECOME ⟨potentially digest⟩ (x, y)]].
Lexical causative: feed (§4.2.1).
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
wash: middle. [[ACT⟨manipulate water⟩(x)] CAUSE [BECOME ⟨washed⟩ (x)]].
Transitive wash (someone) is the antireflexivized form (§4.2.2).
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
dress: middle. [[ACT⟨manipulate clothes⟩(x)] CAUSE [BECOME ⟨dressed⟩ (x)]].
Transitive dress (someone) is the antireflexivized form (§4.2.3).
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
learn: proposed metaphorical ingestive.
[[ACT(x)] CAUSE [BECOME ⟨know⟩ (x, y)]].
Lexical causative: teach (§4.2.4).
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
All four verbs pass the again ambiguity diagnostic.
All four verbs pass the re- prefixation diagnostic.
All four verbs pass the almost ambiguity diagnostic.
All four verbs pass the negation-over-CAUSE diagnostic.
All four diagnostics pass for every verb in the dataset: the simple forms of eat, wash, dress, and learn are bieventive.
Middles and ingestives are both represented.
@cite{krejci-2012}'s central operation: the lexical causative of a lexically reflexive verb is derived by antireflexivization — splitting the coidentified causer-causee into two distinct participants.
Reflexive form (eat):
`[[ACT⟨manipulate food⟩(x)] CAUSE [BECOME ⟨potentially digest⟩ (x, y)]]`
— one participant (x) is both causer and causee.
Antireflexive form (feed):
`[[ACT⟨manipulate food⟩(x)] CAUSE [BECOME ⟨potentially digest⟩ (y, z)]]`
— causer (x) and causee (y) are distinct participants.
Key evidence (§4.2.1): with *eat*, the eater must agentively
manipulate food; with *feed*, this entailment shifts to the feeder.
With *make eat* (syntactic causative), the eater retains the
manipulation entailment. This shows *feed* ≠ *make eat*: the lexical
and syntactic causatives have different event structures.
An antireflexive pair: a lexically reflexive verb and its suppletive lexical causative. Only verbs with a distinct lexical causative form have such pairs (eat→feed, learn→teach). Middles (wash, dress) use the same form transitively — the antireflexivization is structural, not morphological.
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Equations
- Phenomena.Causation.Studies.Krejci2012.eatFeed = { reflexive := "eat", causative := "feed" }
Instances For
Equations
- Phenomena.Causation.Studies.Krejci2012.learnTeach = { reflexive := "learn", causative := "teach" }
Instances For
The suppletive pairs are derivable from the verb data.
Middles use the same form transitively (no suppletive pair).
@cite{krejci-2012}'s claim that eat and dress have causative event
structure aligns with their RootEntailments classification:
both are causativeResult (state + result + cause), meaning the
root itself entails external causation.
eat roots are causativeResult: the root entails caused consumption.
dress roots are causativeResult: the root entails caused dressed state.
causativeResult roots entail cause — consistent with @cite{krejci-2012}'s analysis that these verbs have CAUSE in their simple forms.
The root→template pipeline predicts that eat and dress roots license the accomplishment template (since they entail causation). The accomplishment template in turn has an intransitive variant (achievement). But eat/dress do NOT undergo the standard causative/inchoative alternation (*"The food ate", *"The clothes dressed") — the root's obligatory agentive entailments block it.
Instead, the causativization operation is antireflexivization:
splitting a coidentified participant, not adding a new external
cause.
eat roots license the accomplishment template.
eat's primary template is accomplishment.
eat's ArgTemplate is consumption (agent + incremental theme).
The accomplishment template has an intransitive variant (achievement). This is the template-level possibility that eat/dress could alternate — but root semantics blocks it.
causativeResult roots derive 3 ArgTemplates (state, achievement, accomplishment). The template infrastructure predicts alternation; the blocking is root-level, not template-level.
The intransitive variant retains the result state (the BECOME sub-event persists).
The intransitive variant loses CAUSE.
@cite{krejci-2012}'s central theoretical claim: lexically reflexive verbs have reflexive intransitivization (coidentification of causer and causee), not anticausative intransitivization (removal of the external cause). This is what makes their simple forms bieventive — the causer position is retained, filled by the same participant as the causee.
The connection: all four verb-level diagnostics (§4.3–4.5) detect
bieventive structure, and `IntransitivizationType.reflexive` is the
type-level characterization of exactly that structure.
Reflexive intransitivization is bieventive — matching what the four verb-level diagnostics detect.
Anticausative intransitivization is monoeventive — the diagnostics would NOT detect bieventive structure for true anticausatives.
Reflexive intransitivization involves coidentification of causer and causee — the structural basis of lexical reflexivity.
Reflexive intransitives license "by itself" (§4.5, (114a–d)), because a causer position exists (even if coidentified).
True anticausatives do NOT license "by itself" — no causer position to negate with "without outside help".
@cite{krejci-2012}'s reflexive/anticausative distinction maps onto the Voice typology in Minimalism: reflexive intransitives correspond to middle Voice (bieventive, coidentification), and true anticausatives correspond to anticausative Voice (monoeventive, cause removed). Both lack an external argument in Spec,VoiceP.
Anticausative Voice does not assign a θ-role (no external argument).
Middle Voice does not assign a θ-role.
@cite{krejci-2012} Table 2.8 validates the causativizability
hierarchy across 12 languages. This data is formalized in
MorphologicalCausation.krejciLanguages and verified by
MorphologicalCausation.krejci_hierarchy_holds.
The hierarchy is implicational:
unaccusatives > middles/ingestives > unergatives > simple transitives
The key contribution is establishing middles/ingestives as a
distinct tier: Type 1 languages (Slave, Mapudungun, Classical
Nahuatl) causativize only unaccusatives; Type 2 (Cora, Marathi,
Amharic) add middles/ingestives; Type 3 (Ahtna, Tariana, Malayalam)
add unergatives; Type 4 (Basque, Dulong/Rawang, Koyukon) add simple
transitives. No language skips tiers.
The causativizability hierarchy holds for all 12 languages.