Table Of ContentBosse_cpi_cb_rauch dd no metallic.qxd 4/11/2015 9:22 AM Page 1
93 B E R K E L E Y
I N S I G H T S
B
o IN LINGUISTICS
s
s
Applicative Arguments: A Syntactic and Semantic Investiga- e AND SEMIOTICS
tion of German and English presents formal semantic and
93
syntactic analyses of German and English applicative argu-
ments. These arguments are nominal elements that are not
obligatory parts of a sentence. Both German and English
A
have several types of applicative arguments, including so-
p
called benefactive and malefactive constructions. More
p
specifically, the research relies on tests to differentiate the
l
different types of applicative arguments based on this contri-
i
c
bution to meaning: Some applicatives contribute only not-at-
a
issue meaning, whereas others contribute only at-issue
t
meaning, and still others contribute both types of meaning.
i
v
These tests are applied to both German and English to
e
uniquely identify the applicative arguments in each language.
Formal analyses of the identified type of applicative argu- A
ments are presented that provide an account for each type of
r
applicative identified for each language, explaining the g
applicatives’ differences and similarities. u
m
Solveig Bosse received her Ph.D. in linguistics from the
University of Delaware. She is currently Assistant Professor of e
n
Theoretical Linguistics in the Department of English at East
Carolina University. Her research focuses on syntactic and t
s
formal semantic analyses of German and English with occa-
sional other cross-linguistic comparisons.
APPLICATIVE
ARGUMENTS
A Syntactic Semantic
AND
P
E Investigation
T OF
E
R
German English
L AND
A
N
G
SOLVEIG BOSSE
WWW.PETERLANG.COM
Bosse_cpi_cb_rauch dd no metallic.qxd 4/11/2015 9:22 AM Page 1
93 B E R K E L E Y
I N S I G H T S
B
o IN LINGUISTICS
s
s
Applicative Arguments: A Syntactic and Semantic Investiga- e AND SEMIOTICS
tion of German and English presents formal semantic and
93
syntactic analyses of German and English applicative argu-
ments. These arguments are nominal elements that are not
obligatory parts of a sentence. Both German and English
A
have several types of applicative arguments, including so-
p
called benefactive and malefactive constructions. More
p
specifically, the research relies on tests to differentiate the
l
different types of applicative arguments based on this contri-
i
c
bution to meaning: Some applicatives contribute only not-at-
a
issue meaning, whereas others contribute only at-issue
t
meaning, and still others contribute both types of meaning.
i
v
These tests are applied to both German and English to
e
uniquely identify the applicative arguments in each language.
Formal analyses of the identified type of applicative argu- A
ments are presented that provide an account for each type of
r
applicative identified for each language, explaining the g
applicatives’ differences and similarities. u
m
Solveig Bosse received her Ph.D. in linguistics from the
University of Delaware. She is currently Assistant Professor of e
n
Theoretical Linguistics in the Department of English at East
Carolina University. Her research focuses on syntactic and t
s
formal semantic analyses of German and English with occa-
sional other cross-linguistic comparisons.
APPLICATIVE
ARGUMENTS
A Syntactic Semantic
AND
P
E Investigation
T OF
E
R
German English
L AND
A
N
G
SOLVEIG BOSSE
WWW.PETERLANG.COM
APPLICATIVE
ARGUMENTS
B E R K E L E Y
I N S I G H T S
I N LINGUISTICS
AND SEMIOTICS
Irmengard Rauch
General Editor
Vol. 93
This book is a volume in a Peter Lang monograph series.
Every volume is peer reviewed and meets
the highest quality standards for content and production.
PETER LANG
New York Bern Frankfurt Berlin
Brussels Vienna Oxford Warsaw
SOLVEIG BOSSE
APPLICATIVE
ARGUMENTS
A Syntactic Semantic
AND
Investigation
OF
German English
AND
PETER LANG
New York Bern Frankfurt Berlin
Brussels Vienna Oxford Warsaw
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Bosse, Solveig.
Applicative arguments: a syntactic and semantic investigation
of German and English / Solveig Bosse.
pages cm. — (Berkeley insights in linguistics and semiotics; v. 93)
Originally published as author’s dissertation entitled
“The syntax and semantics of applicative arguments in German and English”, 2011.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
1. Grammar, Comparative and general—Applicative constructions.
2. German language—Syntax. 3. German language—Semantics.
4. English language—Syntax. 5. English language—Semantics. I. Title.
P291.25.B67 425—dc 3 2014010339
ISBN 978-1-4331-2726-7 (hardcover)
ISBN 978-1-4539-1354-3 (e-book)
ISSN 0893-6935
Bibliographic information published by Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek.
Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the “Deutsche
Nationalbibliografie”; detailed bibliographic data are available
on the Internet at http://dnb.d-nb.de/.
© 2015 Peter Lang Publishing, Inc., New York
29 Broadway, 18th floor, New York, NY 10006
www.peterlang.com
All rights reserved.
Reprint or reproduction, even partially, in all forms such as microfilm,
xerography, microfiche, microcard, and offset strictly prohibited.
Acknowledgments
This book is a revised version of my Ph.D. dissertation (2011, University of
Delaware). Consequently, it would not have been possible without the help of
Dr. Benjamin Bruening. Thank you for your support throughout the years! Many
thanks go to my Ph.D. committee members Dr. Satoshi Tomioka, Dr. Gabrielle
Hermon and Professor Dr. Daniel Hole for their support and invaluable com-
ments. Thank you to everyone at the Department of Linguistics at the University
of Delaware!
Many thanks to all the different audiences that have provided feedback on
my work at conferences and workshops over the last few years. I enjoyed the
discussions and they provided me with many details discussed in this book.
A big THANK YOU to everyone who has supported me since I graduated,
especially to the members of the Department of Linguistics at The University of
Iowa and very special thanks to the Department of English at East Carolina Uni-
versity. Thank you for your continued support.
To my parents Raphaele and Arnd Bosse: Thank you for you support, en-
couraging words, and for always being there for me – even if there's an ocean
between us. DANKE!
Last but not least to all of my friends, new and old, for your support: Thank
you for being there when I needed to vent or celebrate. Time passes but the
memories will stay forever.
(cid:1)
Contents
1(cid:1) Introduction 11(cid:1)
1.1(cid:1) Defining Applicative Arguments 13(cid:1)
1.2(cid:1) Goals and Structure of this Book 17(cid:1)
2(cid:1) Preliminaries 19(cid:1)
2.1(cid:1) Introduction 19(cid:1)
2.2(cid:1) Not-At-Issue Meaning 19(cid:1)
2.3(cid:1) Event Semantics 23(cid:1)
2.4(cid:1) Pylkkänen (2002, 2008) 26(cid:1)
3(cid:1) Affected Experiencers 29(cid:1)
3.1(cid:1) Introduction 29(cid:1)
3.2(cid:1) Distinguishing Affected Experiencers 30(cid:1)
3.2.1(cid:1) Benefactives (Chapter 5) 31(cid:1)
3.2.2(cid:1) Part-Whole Applicative Arguments (Chapter 6) & Pertinence
Datives 32(cid:1)
3.2.3(cid:1) Other German Applicatives 35(cid:1)
3.3(cid:1) At-Issue and Not-At-Issue Meaning 36(cid:1)
3.3.1(cid:1) Affected Experiencers 36(cid:1)
3.3.2(cid:1) Pertinence Dative 38(cid:1)
3.4(cid:1) Analysis 40(cid:1)
3.5(cid:1) Consequences 44(cid:1)
3.5.1(cid:1) Bi-Eventivity 44(cid:1)
3.5.2(cid:1) Again-Modification 46(cid:1)
3.5.3(cid:1) Negation 48(cid:1)
3.6(cid:1) Pertinence Dative 49(cid:1)
3.6.1(cid:1) Analysis 50(cid:1)
3.6.2(cid:1) Previous Analyses 56(cid:1)
3.6.3(cid:1) Conclusion 65(cid:1)
3.7(cid:1) Verbal Restrictions 65(cid:1)
3.7.1(cid:1) Valency 65(cid:1)
3.7.2(cid:1) Semantic Licensing 67(cid:1)
3.8(cid:1) Affected Experiencers following Potts (2005) 72(cid:1)
3.9(cid:1) Digression: Parametric Variation of Aff 73(cid:1)
3.9.1(cid:1) Japanese: Attachment Height Variation 73(cid:1)
3.9.2(cid:1) Not-At-Issue Affected Experiencers 78(cid:1)
3.9.3(cid:1) Parametric Variation 86(cid:1)
3.10(cid:1)Conclusion 87(cid:1)
4(cid:1) Not-At-Issue Applicative Arguments 89(cid:1)
4.1(cid:1) Introduction 89(cid:1)
4.2(cid:1) Ethical Dative 89(cid:1)
4.2.1(cid:1) Description 90(cid:1)
(cid:1)
8 (cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:1)
4.2.2(cid:1) Analysis 96(cid:1)
4.2.3(cid:1) Summary 100(cid:1)
4.3(cid:1) Subject Co-Referential Applicative Arguments 101(cid:1)
4.3.1(cid:1) Description 101(cid:1)
4.3.2(cid:1) Features 102(cid:1)
4.3.3(cid:1) Form 104(cid:1)
4.3.4(cid:1) Role of the Direct Object 106(cid:1)
4.3.5(cid:1) Not-At-Issue Meaning 106(cid:1)
4.3.6(cid:1) Analysis 108(cid:1)
4.3.7(cid:1) Consequences 109(cid:1)
4.3.8(cid:1) Previous Analyses 111(cid:1)
4.3.9(cid:1) Summary 115(cid:1)
4.4(cid:1) Not-At-Issue Applicatives 115(cid:1)
4.5(cid:1) Conclusion 117(cid:1)
5(cid:1) Benefactives 119(cid:1)
5.1(cid:1) Introduction 119(cid:1)
5.2(cid:1) Description 119(cid:1)
5.2.1(cid:1) English 121(cid:1)
5.2.2(cid:1) German 122(cid:1)
5.3(cid:1) At-Issue Content 124(cid:1)
5.4(cid:1) True Applicative Benefactives 125(cid:1)
5.4.1(cid:1) Analysis 125(cid:1)
5.4.2(cid:1) Consequences 126(cid:1)
5.4.3(cid:1) Verbal Restrictions 129(cid:1)
5.4.4(cid:1) Hole (2005; 201X) 131(cid:1)
5.4.5(cid:1) Summary 135(cid:1)
5.5(cid:1) Recipient Benefactives 135(cid:1)
5.5.1(cid:1) Meaning 135(cid:1)
5.5.2(cid:1) Ditransitives and Benefactives 136(cid:1)
5.5.3(cid:1) Analysis 137(cid:1)
5.5.4(cid:1) Consequences 138(cid:1)
5.5.5(cid:1) Summary 140(cid:1)
5.6(cid:1) Prepositional Alternation 140(cid:1)
5.6.1(cid:1) Analysis 140(cid:1)
5.6.2(cid:1) Consequences 143(cid:1)
5.6.3(cid:1) PP-shells 144(cid:1)
5.7(cid:1) Conclusion 147(cid:1)
6(cid:1) Part-Whole Applicatives 148(cid:1)
6.1(cid:1) Introduction 148(cid:1)
6.2(cid:1) Description 150(cid:1)
6.2.1(cid:1) Differentiating Part-Whole Applicative Arguments 150(cid:1)
6.2.2(cid:1) Characteristics 152(cid:1)
(cid:1)
