The Relevance of Unaccusativity to Possessive Datives

IF 1.6 1区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Linguistic Inquiry Pub Date : 2024-04-01 DOI:10.1162/ling_a_00532
Ziv Plotnik, Aya Meltzer-Asscher, Tal Siloni
{"title":"The Relevance of Unaccusativity to Possessive Datives","authors":"Ziv Plotnik, Aya Meltzer-Asscher, Tal Siloni","doi":"10.1162/ling_a_00532","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The possessive dative construction has been widely adopted as an unaccusativity diagnostic (Borer and Grodzinsky 1986). Gafter (2014) casts doubt on the relevance of unaccusativity to the acceptability of the construction. We ran a series of acceptability judgment experiments to investigate the validity of the possessive dative construction as an unaccusativity diagnostic, controlling for possible confounds such as animacy, definiteness, plausibility, lexical choice, type of possession and context salience. The experiments reveal that possessive datives are significantly more acceptable with unaccusative verbs than with unergatives, including reflexive and emission verbs. We conclude that unaccusatives, but not unergatives, are grammatical in the construction, and defend a structural account of the data.","PeriodicalId":48044,"journal":{"name":"Linguistic Inquiry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Linguistic Inquiry","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00532","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The possessive dative construction has been widely adopted as an unaccusativity diagnostic (Borer and Grodzinsky 1986). Gafter (2014) casts doubt on the relevance of unaccusativity to the acceptability of the construction. We ran a series of acceptability judgment experiments to investigate the validity of the possessive dative construction as an unaccusativity diagnostic, controlling for possible confounds such as animacy, definiteness, plausibility, lexical choice, type of possession and context salience. The experiments reveal that possessive datives are significantly more acceptable with unaccusative verbs than with unergatives, including reflexive and emission verbs. We conclude that unaccusatives, but not unergatives, are grammatical in the construction, and defend a structural account of the data.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
非指称性与所有格助词的相关性
占有性助词结构已被广泛用作非指称性诊断(Borer 和 Grodzinsky,1986 年)。Gafter(2014)对非指称性与结构可接受性的相关性提出了质疑。我们进行了一系列可接受性判断实验,以研究占有性助词结构作为非指称性诊断的有效性,并控制了可能的混淆因素,如生动性、确定性、可信性、词汇选择、占有类型和语境显著性。实验结果表明,与非指称动词(包括反身动词和发出动词)一起使用时,占有性助词的可接受性明显高于与非谓语动词一起使用时。我们的结论是,在结构上,非指称动词(而不是非ergatives)是符合语法的,并为数据的结构解释进行了辩护。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Linguistic Inquiry
Linguistic Inquiry Multiple-
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
12.50%
发文量
54
期刊介绍: Linguistic Inquiry leads the field in research on current topics in linguistics. This key resource explores new theoretical developments based on the latest international scholarship, capturing the excitement of contemporary debate in full-scale articles as well as shorter contributions (Squibs and Discussion) and more extensive commentary (Remarks and Replies).
期刊最新文献
Inverse Linking and Extraposition VP-Preposing and Constituency “Paradox” Using Computational Models to Test Syntactic Learnability Applicative Recursion and Nominal Licensing More on (the Lack of) Reconstruction in English Tough-Constructions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1