Levin (2026): The door pushed open #
@cite{levin-2026}
The door pushed open: an English intransitive resultative construction with transitive-only verbs. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 35:3.
Core contribution #
Identifies a neglected class of English intransitive resultatives — The door pushed open, The cork pulled free, The door slammed shut — where the base verb is transitive-only outside the construction. These verbs (push, slam, pull) cannot occur intransitively without the result phrase: *The door pushed.
Proposes that these "intr-push open" resultatives are the anticausative variant of the causative alternation, with their transitive counterparts (Pat pushed the door open) as the causative variant. The resultative construction itself licenses the alternation that the verb lacks in isolation.
Key empirical findings #
- Verb restriction: only verbs of exerting force (Levin §12) and verbs of surface contact (§18 hitting, §10.4 wiping subtypes)
- Adjective restriction: only open, closed, shut, free, loose, flat — all describing spatially instantiated states
- Verb–adjective combination is critical: neither alone suffices
- Discourse licensing: anticausative conditions — cause recoverable in context or identity unknown to speaker
- Semantic licensing: subject DP must be capable of autonomous motion ("projectile" — entity imbued with force that can act without continuous external involvement)
- Proper Containment Condition (@cite{rappaport-hovav-levin-2012}): when the cause is continuously involved, the causative variant is required — blocking the intr-push open pattern
Architecture #
This study connects four existing layers:
Core.Lexical.LevinClass: verb classes lack causative alternation (§12, §18)Theories.Semantics.Causation.Resultatives: construction adds CAUSE; PCC maps onto the independent-source/tightness infrastructureFragments.English.Predicates: verb and adjective entriesPhenomena.ArgumentStructure.DiathesisAlternations: existing alternation data
The central theoretical insight — that constructions can license
alternation behavior that verbs lack in isolation — is a construction
grammar point that the current verb-level participatesIn infrastructure
does not directly accommodate. This file formalizes the specific case.
Verb inventory #
The verbs attested in intr-push open resultatives describe the application of force to an entity. They are drawn from two subclasses of manner verbs: verbs of exerting force (§12) and verbs of surface contact (§18 hitting, §10.4 wiping).
Note: scrape and sweep are Levin §10.4 (wipe) verbs, but in intr-push open they participate through their surface contact sense, not their removing sense. Wipe verbs as a class DO show the causative alternation (they lexicalize CoS). These verbs enter the construction because only their force-application component is relevant, not the removal result.
The core Levin classes for intr-push open verbs.
Verbs of exerting force (§12 = pushPull) and verbs of surface
contact, hitting subtype (§18.1 = hit). Wipe verbs (§10.4) also
participate but are handled separately (see all_verbs_from_predicted_classes).
Equations
Instances For
All core intr-push open verb classes lack the causative alternation in isolation. This is the key precondition: the verb alone does not alternate, so the construction must license the alternation.
Cross-reference: the existing alternation data in
DiathesisAlternations.Data already records that hit (§18.1) is
blocked for causative/inchoative. Our theorem agrees.
All core classes are pure manner roots (@cite{beavers-koontz-garboden-2020}): they encode no state, no result, no causation. The result and causation come from the construction.
All core classes encode contact and motion but NOT change of state and NOT causation. This is why they don't show the causative alternation (@cite{fillmore-1970}): no scalar change is lexicalized.
Fragment verb entries confirm the classification.
Construction-dependent alternation (@cite{goldberg-1995}) #
The key derivation: these verbs cannot alternate alone (shown above),
but they CAN alternate inside the resultative construction. The
resultative adds CoS + causation via semanticContribution; the
composed meaning has all four components needed for the causative
alternation. No new alternation logic is needed — predictedAlternation
on the fused result fires automatically.
This formalizes the paper's central insight (§3): "when such verbs are found in a resultative, the construction as a whole describes a change of state ... properties of the resultative construction itself are implicated in the 'loosening' of transitivity that characterizes intr-push open resultatives."
PushPull alone: no causative alternation.
PushPull in the resultative: causative alternation predicted.
The construction adds CoS + causation → the composed meaning
has changeOfState && causation, which is the precondition.
Hit alone: no causative alternation.
Hit in the resultative: causative alternation predicted.
All core intr-push-open classes alternate in the resultative.
Middle construction parallel (§2, examples 17–18) #
The paper shows pound enters the middle construction only with a
result phrase: "*This kind of metal pounds easily" vs "This kind of
metal pounds flat easily." The existing predictedAlternationInConstruction
infrastructure derives this — the middle alternation requires CoS,
which comes from the resultative construction, not the verb.
Hit-class verbs (including pound) cannot enter the middle alone.
Hit-class verbs CAN enter the middle inside the resultative. This derives the paper's observation (18b) from the same mechanism.
Adjective inventory #
Only a small set of adjectives heads the result phrase in intr-push open resultatives. Each describes a spatially instantiated state — a state whose attainment requires the entity to be in a specific spatial configuration with respect to a reference entity.
Three semantic subtypes:
- Barrier configuration: open, closed, shut — spatial configuration of a barrier (door, gate, window) relative to its frame
- Unattachment: free, loose — freedom from spatial contiguity with a reference entity (frame, bottle, ground)
- Surface orientation: flat — orientation relative to a reference surface
Reuse the theory-level SpatialConfigType from Adjective.Theory.
Equations
Instances For
All six attested adjectives have a spatial classification in their Fragment entries (structural, not string-based).
All attested adjectives are closed-scale (absolute) in @cite{kennedy-2007}'s terms. Spatially instantiated states have crisp endpoints (fully open vs. fully closed).
Adjectives in senses that are NOT spatially instantiated do not
appear in intr-push open resultatives, even when they occur in
transitive resultatives. The non-spatial senses of free ("free
of charge", "free of debris") and loose ("loose shoelaces") are
not attested. Adjectives like bald, firm, senseless, red have no
spatialConfigType in the Fragment and are never attested in
intr-push open resultatives (examples 57b–60b).
Transitive–intransitive pairing #
The paper's central argument (§3): tr-push open and intr-push open form a causative alternation pair. The transitive is the causative variant; the intransitive is the anticausative variant. Both share the same verb–adjective combination and the same constructional meaning:
- Causative:
[Agent_effector V NP] CAUSE [NP BECOME Adj] - Anticausative:
[NP BECOME Adj](cause suppressed)
An alternation pair: transitive and intransitive resultative with the same verb–adjective combination.
- verb : String
- adjective : String
- transitive : String
- intransitive : String
- bareIntransitive : String
- verbClass : LevinClass
- adjType : SpatialAdjType
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.Constructions.Resultatives.Studies.Levin2026.instBEqAlternationPair.beq x✝¹ x✝ = false
Instances For
Push–open (examples 19, 20; 10a,b).
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Pull–free (examples 21, 22; 13a,b).
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Slam–shut (fn. 11; intransitive from example 23).
Note: slam is polysemous — in Pat slammed the door / The door slammed
it has a closing-with-impact sense that independently shows the causative
alternation. The .hit classification here applies to the surface-contact
sense, not the closing sense. The transitive resultative is not explicitly
given in the paper but is implied by the alternation pair analysis.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Punch–open (intransitive from example 11a; transitive implied).
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Fling–open (intransitive from example 33; transitive implied).
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Scrape–free (intransitive from example 39; transitive implied).
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Smack–flat (intransitive from example 48; transitive implied).
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Thump–closed (intransitive from example 12a; transitive from 12b).
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 pairs use verbs from the predicted classes (pushPull, hit — or wipe for scrape/sweep).
Each core-class pair (pushPull, hit) is blocked alone but gains the causative alternation inside the resultative construction. Wipe verbs (scrape/sweep) are excluded: they independently alternate because they lexicalize CoS; they enter the construction through their surface-contact sense, not their removing sense.
Each pair's adjType agrees with the Fragment entry's spatialConfigType.
Negative evidence: verb alone doesn't suffice #
Verbs outside the predicted classes do not license intr-push open even with an appropriate adjective (examples 51–56).
Verbs that occur in transitive resultatives with the relevant adjectives but lack intr-push open counterparts.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Negative evidence: adjective alone doesn't suffice #
Even in their spatially instantiated senses, the adjectives can appear in transitive resultatives with verbs of the right type, yet the transitive resultative lacks an intr-push open counterpart when the COMBINATION is wrong (examples 57–60).
Causal dynamics and event decomposition #
The constructional meaning of resultatives (§3, example 25):
[Action denoted by verb] causes [change into state denoted by RP]
For tr-push open (§3, example 30):
[Sam_effector push the door] CAUSE [the door BECOME open]
The constructional CAUSE comes from the resultative, not from the verb.
The constructional BECOME maps to CoSType.inception (¬open → open).
The constructional BECOME in resultatives = inception (¬P → P).
This connects to the existing ChangeOfState infrastructure.
Equations
Instances For
"Pat pushed the door open": pushing → open.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
The verbal subevent is causally sufficient for the result.
The verbal subevent is the completion event (sufficient + necessary),
matching the CC-selection analysis in Resultatives.lean.
The resultative uses the .make builder (sufficiency).
Bridge: ConstructionGrammar ↔ CausalDynamics #
Two independent systems model the "construction adds causation" insight:
ArgStructureConstruction.semanticContribution.causation(Boolean flag)CausalDynamics.laws(structural equations)
The Boolean layer predicts alternation behavior; the structural layer
models how the causation works (sufficiency, necessity, tightness).
They must agree: causation = true ↔ dynamics non-empty.
Consistency between the Boolean and structural causation layers.
Equations
Instances For
The resultative construction + push-open dynamics are consistent: both say "there is causation."
The resultative construction + freeze-solid dynamics are INconsistent: the construction says causation but the dynamics are empty. This formally captures why freeze-solid is a noncausative resultative — it uses a DIFFERENT construction (noncausative) with no causation flag.
Key contrast: intr-push-open ≠ freeze-solid #
"The river froze solid" is a noncausative resultative where freeze independently shows the causative alternation and the causal dynamics are empty (no constructional CAUSE).
"The door pushed open" is fundamentally different: push does NOT independently alternate, and the causal dynamics are non-empty. The cause exists but is suppressed — this is an anticausative, not a lexically noncausative.
Intr-push open has non-empty dynamics; freeze solid has empty. This is the formal reflex of the paper's central claim.
Freeze independently shows the causative alternation; push does not. This confirms the classification: freeze solid is a standard noncausative resultative with an alternating verb, while push open must be an anticausative licensed by the construction.
PCC and the independent-source analysis #
The Proper Containment Condition (@cite{rappaport-hovav-levin-2012}): "When a change of state is properly contained within a causing act, the argument representing that act must be expressed in the same clause as the verb describing the change of state."
This maps onto the independent-source/tightness analysis already
formalized in Causation/Resultatives.lean:
Projectile (door after a push): the door has kinetic energy — an independent source. Once pushed, the door continues to swing without the agent. The agent's involvement is NOT continuously required. → The theme has an independent source → the cause is not necessary → anticausative OK.
Continuous involvement (nailing a door shut): the agent must sustain force throughout. The door has NO independent source of motion. → No independent source → the cause IS necessary → the anticausative is blocked (PCC requires expressing the cause).
Projectile model: agent applies force → theme gains momentum → theme reaches result state. The theme's momentum is an independent source (kinetic energy persists after the push).
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Continuous-involvement model: agent applies force → result state directly. No intermediate with independent energy.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
In the projectile model, the theme's momentum is NOT an independent source (no separate law feeds it — the agent's push IS the source). But the crucial point is architectural: the intermediate stage (momentum) means the agent can withdraw after the initial force application.
In the continuous model, the agent IS the completion event.
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
When the theme has independent energy, the agent's force is no
longer necessary — the theme can reach the result state on its own.
completesForEffect = false because necessity fails.
The theme's momentum HAS an independent source in this model.
Anticausative discourse conditions #
@cite{rappaport-hovav-2014} identifies two discourse situations where the anticausative variant is preferred over the causative:
- The cause is recoverable from the discourse context — it has been established earlier or follows from the natural course of events (§5, examples 62–68).
- The speaker does not know the identity of the cause — the existence of a cause can be inferred but its identity is unknown (§5, examples 69–71; McCawley 1978).
Intr-push open resultatives are found in precisely these two contexts.
How the cause relates to the discourse context.
- recoverableInContext : CauseStatus
Cause established in prior discourse or natural course of events. "The dry soil thawed ... the roots pulled free." (§5, ex. 64)
- identityUnknown : CauseStatus
Cause inferable but identity unknown to speaker. "The door pushed open and a man walked in." (§5, ex. 70)
- notRecoverable : CauseStatus
Cause novel and not recoverable; causative variant required.
Instances For
Equations
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
The anticausative variant is licensed when the cause is recoverable or unknown.
Equations
- Phenomena.Constructions.Resultatives.Studies.Levin2026.anticausativeLicensed Phenomena.Constructions.Resultatives.Studies.Levin2026.CauseStatus.recoverableInContext = true
- Phenomena.Constructions.Resultatives.Studies.Levin2026.anticausativeLicensed Phenomena.Constructions.Resultatives.Studies.Levin2026.CauseStatus.identityUnknown = true
- Phenomena.Constructions.Resultatives.Studies.Levin2026.anticausativeLicensed Phenomena.Constructions.Resultatives.Studies.Levin2026.CauseStatus.notRecoverable = false
Instances For
The projectile property #
The subject DP must be capable of autonomous motion: it must be able to move along the trajectory defined by the result state without requiring an external agent's sustained participation (§6).
The attested subjects qualify as "projectiles" (@cite{kearns-2000}): entities that move due to their own kinetic energy and can impart this energy to another entity through contact. This includes entities that are not machines but are construed as force-imbued (doors after a push, corks in bottles, roots in thawing soil).
The same types of entities pass the "What X did" diagnostic for effectors (fn. 17): agents, natural forces, machines, and projectiles.
Classification of the theme (subject DP).
- animate : ThemeMotionCapacity
Self-energetic entity (agent, animal).
- machine : ThemeMotionCapacity
Machine with independent power source (tractor, vehicle).
- projectile : ThemeMotionCapacity
Entity imbued with force via the verbal action: after a push, the door continues to swing without the agent's involvement. Includes entities construed as moving under transferred kinetic energy (doors, corks, roots, prongs).
- requiresContinuousForce : ThemeMotionCapacity
Entity requiring continuous external manipulation to move: nails being hammered, instruments being wielded.
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Whether a theme can serve as subject of intr-push open.
Equations
- Phenomena.Constructions.Resultatives.Studies.Levin2026.canBeIntrPushOpenSubject Phenomena.Constructions.Resultatives.Studies.Levin2026.ThemeMotionCapacity.animate = true
- Phenomena.Constructions.Resultatives.Studies.Levin2026.canBeIntrPushOpenSubject Phenomena.Constructions.Resultatives.Studies.Levin2026.ThemeMotionCapacity.machine = true
- Phenomena.Constructions.Resultatives.Studies.Levin2026.canBeIntrPushOpenSubject Phenomena.Constructions.Resultatives.Studies.Levin2026.ThemeMotionCapacity.projectile = true
- Phenomena.Constructions.Resultatives.Studies.Levin2026.canBeIntrPushOpenSubject Phenomena.Constructions.Resultatives.Studies.Levin2026.ThemeMotionCapacity.requiresContinuousForce = false
Instances For
Entities requiring continuous external manipulation are blocked. "My father nailed the door shut" (§6, ex. 74) is OK, but "*The root cellar door nailed shut" (§6, ex. 75) is unacceptable.
Connection to directed motion #
The same verbs appear intransitively in directed motion event descriptions (§7, examples 84–85):
- "The tennis ball slammed into the net." (84a)
- "The chair scraped across the floor." (84b)
These share the same licensing condition: the theme must be capable of autonomous motion. This provides independent support.
Note: natural forces (storm, wind) are attested as subjects of directed motion (85b) but NOT of intr-push open resultatives, because the relevant adjectives cannot be predicated of them (*an open storm/wind).
A directed motion event description with a surface-contact verb.
- verb : String
- sentence : String
- themeType : ThemeMotionCapacity
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.Constructions.Resultatives.Studies.Levin2026.instBEqDirectedMotionDatum.beq x✝¹ x✝ = false
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.
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.
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
All directed motion themes satisfy the autonomous motion condition, paralleling intr-push open.
Natural forces (storm, wind) are attested as directed motion subjects — (85b) "The storm swept through the valley" — but NOT in intr-push open resultatives. The blocking mechanism is the adjective restriction: the relevant adjectives cannot be predicated of natural forces (*an open storm), so no licensed verb–adjective combination exists. The theme passes the autonomous motion test but the adjective filter blocks it independently.
The licensing conjunction #
An intr-push open resultative is licensed iff ALL of:
- The verb is from a force-application class (§12, §18)
- The adjective describes a spatially instantiated state
- The discourse context licenses cause suppression
- The theme is capable of autonomous motion
Full licensing check for an intr-push open resultative.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
"The door pushed open" in a recoverable-cause context is licensed.
"The door pushed open" in a cause-unknown context is licensed.
Blocked: theme requires continuous force (PCC).
Blocked: verb class wrong (break is a CoS verb, not force).
End-to-end: the full argument chain #
- push is pushPull (§12) → pure manner, no CoS, no causation
- No causative alternation for pushPull alone (meaning-component prediction)
- Fusion: resultative construction adds CoS + causation → composed meaning now predicts the causative alternation
- Resultative construction adds CAUSE (non-empty CausalDynamics)
- Constructional BECOME = inception (CoSType.inception)
- Constructional CAUSE =
.make(sufficiency, completion event) - Anticausative: cause suppressed under discourse licensing
- PCC: projectile has independent energy → cause not continuously needed
- Theme passes autonomous-motion check → anticausative OK
FilledResultative: unifying the Boolean and structural layers #
The construction grammar layer (MeaningComponents, fusion, alternation prediction)
and the causation layer (CausalDynamics, sufficiency, necessity, tightness) run
in parallel. FilledResultative bundles them into a single type where their
agreement is a proof obligation — not an informal invariant.
This is the formal reflex of @cite{levin-2026}'s analysis: a resultative is a construction filled with specific lexical material (verb class, adjective), and the filling must satisfy both the Boolean-level alternation prediction and the structural-level causal dynamics.
A resultative construction instantiated with its lexical fillers.
Bundles the three components of @cite{levin-2026}'s analysis:
- Verb class — contributes manner semantics (force application)
- Adjective — contributes result state (spatially instantiated)
- Construction — contributes CAUSE + CoS (event structure)
Plus the causal dynamics that model HOW the causation works. The proof fields enforce consistency across the Boolean and structural layers.
- verbClass : LevinClass
The verb's Levin class (manner root)
The result-state adjective (from Fragment)
- construction : ConstructionGrammar.ArgStructureConstruction
The argument structure construction (typically
resultative) - dynamics : Core.StructuralEquationModel.CausalDynamics
The structural causal model for this verb–result combination
- alternationPredicted : ConstructionGrammar.predictedAlternationInConstruction self.verbClass.meaningComponents self.construction DiathesisAlternation.causativeInchoative = true
The construction adds what the verb lacks: fusion predicts the causative alternation for the composed meaning.
The adjective describes a spatially instantiated state.
The Boolean and structural causation layers agree.
Instances For
Whether this filled resultative can surface as an anticausative (intr-push open), given discourse and theme conditions. Checks the verb class restriction in addition to discourse/theme.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Concrete instances #
push open: pushPull + open + resultative + push-door-open dynamics.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
pull free: pushPull + free + resultative.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
slam shut: hit + shut + resultative.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
FilledResultative → licensing #
The isLicensed function and the FilledResultative type encode the same
conditions from different angles. isLicensed is a flat Boolean check;
FilledResultative bundles the conditions as proof obligations. The bridge
theorem shows they agree: any FilledResultative with appropriate discourse
and theme conditions passes isLicensed.
A FilledResultative whose verb class is in intrPushOpenClasses
passes isLicensed for any licensed cause status and theme.
Concrete: pushOpen_filled passes isLicensed in a recoverable-cause,
projectile context.
The anticausative of pushOpen_filled is licensed in the right
discourse context.
The anticausative is blocked when the cause is not recoverable.
The anticausative is blocked when the theme requires continuous force.
FilledResultative ↔ end-to-end chain #
The end_to_end_push_open theorem proved 9 conjuncts individually.
pushOpen_filled encodes three of those (alternation prediction,
spatial adjective, causal consistency) as proof obligations on the type.
The remaining conditions (discourse, theme) are runtime parameters.
pushOpen_filled subsumes the core of end_to_end_push_open:
the type's proof obligations cover steps 1-6.
Connection to ResultativeType #
Intr-push open resultatives are anticausativeProperty in the
Goldberg & Jackendoff typology (added to ResultativeType for
@cite{levin-2026}). This closes the loop between the FilledResultative
type and the broader resultative classification.
Map a FilledResultative to its ResultativeType.
All intr-push open resultatives are anticausative property resultatives:
the verb is transitive-only, the adjective heads a property result phrase,
and the cause is suppressed. The transitive counterpart (tr-push open)
would be causativeProperty, but is modeled separately.
Equations
Instances For
Anticausative property is distinct from noncausative property (freeze solid): the former has a suppressed cause, the latter has no constructional cause at all.
Mandarin cognate #
The paper (§1) motivates the English analysis by drawing parallels to Mandarin, where the verb tuī "push" similarly cannot occur intransitively outside resultative constructions (example 4: tuī fān "push-upend"; examples 5–6 show tuī alone cannot appear intransitively). The Mandarin cognate compound tuī-kāi "push-open" exists as a V-V compound in the Fragment — this bridge connects it to the English analysis.
The Mandarin push-open compound is the cross-linguistic cognate: same verb meaning (push), same result meaning (open), object-oriented.