Documentation

Linglib.Phenomena.Constructions.Resultatives.Studies.Dendikken1995

Resultative — Small Clause Bridge #

@cite{dendikken-1995} @cite{goldberg-jackendoff-2004}@cite{dendikken-1995}: resultative constructions instantiate SC predication with an adjectival or prepositional predicate:

"They hammered the metal flat" → V [SC DP AP]
"She kicked the ball into the field" → V [SC DP PP]

The result-state XP (AP or PP) is the SC predicate; the direct object DP is the SC subject to which the property/path is ascribed.

Resultative types as SC predicate categories #

@cite{goldberg-jackendoff-2004} five-way resultative typology maps onto SC predicate categories:

Resultative typeSC predExample
causativePropertyA"hammer the metal flat"
causativePathP"kick the ball into the field"
noncausativePropertyA"the river froze solid"
noncausativePathP"the ball rolled into the field"
fakeReflexiveA"She laughed herself silly"

Cross-references #

§1. Resultative types → SC predicate categories #

Property resultatives have AP predicates; path resultatives have PP predicates. Both are SC predication structures.

§2. Verification: categorization covers all types #

§3. SC construction from resultative data #

Build a small clause from a resultative datum.

Equations
  • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For

    The SC predicate category is determined by the resultative type.

    §4. Per-datum SC categorization #

    §5. Cross-construction bridge #

    Path resultatives share SC predicate category P with PVCs (particles). This follows from den Dikken's thesis: both involve a P head as the SC predicate. The difference is that in PVCs, the P is a particle (intransitive), while in path resultatives, the P heads a full PP (transitive).