This paper discusses a case of syntax/semantics interaction of a characteristically optimality-theoretic kind. Finnish partitive constructions exhibit a case alternation that is partly semantically, partly syntactically driven. The crucial semantic condition that plays a role in case selection is quantitative determinacy, which replaces the definiteness condition familiar from the Partitive Constraint. The crucial syntactic condition is the Case-OCP which prohibits the assignment of the same case to both the head and its sister. The syntactic and semantic constraints conflict which leads to various kinds of outcomes, including free variation and ambiguity, as well as preferences in expression and preferences in interpretation. We develop an optimality-theoretic analysis of these facts based on partially ordered optimality-theoretic grammars. In such grammars, conflicts among semantic and syntactic constraints are resolved in terms of ranking. Partial ordering is crucial i...

In this paper, we analyse the formation of goal of motion interpretation in English and Italian. We argue that contrary to what has been argued, both languages do form goal of motion interpretations although in a manner constrained by the principles of event structure composition. Parametric variation among the two languages will be driven by: (i) the nature of lexical prepositions available; (ii) the methods of syntactically licensing resultative projections. We extend the account to explain the absence of AP resultatives in Italian.

Abstract not found

Sanskrit presents a classic case of the evolution of aspect to tense. 1 For Proto-Indo-European, the aorist and perfect are reconstructed as purely aspectual categories, with respectively perfective

This paper will examine a class of morphosemantic alternations, where the semantic contrast is in terms of TELICITY, and the encoding alternation is realized on the object argument in affirmative clauses containing personal verb forms.

This paper examines parallels in semantic structure between noun phrases and verbal predicates in constructions in which they are mutually constraining and contribute to the expression of LEXICAL ASPECT and GRAMMATICAL ASPECT. One of the main claims pursued here is that such interactions are semantically motivated: it is the nominal argument linked to the Incremental Theme role that interacts with the aspectual semantics of verbal predicates and sentences, at least in the most typical cases. I will show how such interactions, which appear to be procedural and directional, can be described declaratively within a constraint-based (or unificationbased) framework. This area intersects with lexical semantics, morphology and it poses intriguing problems to the mapping between syntax and semantics. It also provides an excellent basis for cross-linguistic studies and for exploring how nouns and verbs relate to the ontology of individuals and eventualities. The data is mainly drawn from English and Slavic languages, which are compared to German and Finnish. 1

Abstract not found

Nonstative verbs from various lexical fields are often classified as either manner or result verbs: (1) a. MANNER VERBS: specify a manner of carrying out an action.

This paper explores the architecture of the syntax/semantics interface. Many recent theories of lexical meaning assume that argument realization is largely dependent on underlying subevent structure. However, I show that subevent structure is not sufficient to capture certain generalizations about argument realization, focusing on the domain of argument/oblique alternations, where a single argument of a verb can be realized either as a direct or oblique argument. I suggest that for these alternations the relevant semantic property is strength of truth conditions: all else being equal an argument realized as a direct argument in such an alternation will have a monotonically stronger set of truth conditions imposed on it than when it is realized as an oblique. I offer an analysis of object/oblique alternations in particular, suggesting that the weakening truth conditions in a range of such alternations follows from a single Affectedness Hierarchy that captures increasingly more general degrees of affectedness for patient arguments. I show that similar contrasts can be found with indirec object/oblique and subject/oblique alternations as well, on different semantic hierarchies. I conclude by suggesting a theory of weakening truth conditions is not incompatible with subevent semantic analyses of verb meaning, and in fact the two can augment one another. ∗ This paper is based on my dissertation (Beavers 2006), though of course many details are left aside in this presentation.

Fillmore’s well-known case study of two verbs, “The Grammar of Hitting and Breaking ” (1970), effectively illustrates two important points about verb meaning: • A verb’s meaning determines its grammatical behavior: e.g., both hit and break have transitive uses, but diverge in other argument realization options,