Search Results

The alternative approach to argument structure proposed in this book implies that the syntactic system of natural language is remarkably simple, comprised of a reasonably small number of universal syntactic categories. These syntactic categories, some of which may be optional, merge with lexical roots and outputs of previous Merge operations in a fixed order specified by the Universal Order of Merge. The approach requires no operations other than Merge, Agree, and feature matching. In addition, it incorporates a variety of transformational relations (also known as the displacement property) in a maximally simple and straightforward fashion by virtue of the interaction between the Agree/EPP system and the c-selection properties of argument categories. Another radical departure from standard approaches to argument structure is that the three primary argument categories—Agent, Theme, and Affectee—are merged in the order which is the exact opposite of the traditional model.

The standard approach to argument structure has many empirical deficiencies, is not general enough to incorporate well-known descriptive generalizations, and, furthermore, fails to take into account languages in which argument structure is expressed via grammatical function changing morphology on the verbal root. This book proposes a radically different approach to argument structure whereby functional categories merge in bottom-to-top fashion with a predicate or with the output of previous Merge operations in conjunction with a fixed Universal Order of Merge. The approach involves three primary argument types—Agent, Theme, and Affectee—whose hierarchical structures are exactly the opposite of what is normally expected. There are also various kinds of secondary arguments, including Instrument, Benefactive, Source, and Goal.

This chapter examines Affectee, the third primary argument type after Agent and Theme, and shows how it manifests itself. It considers the alternation between prepositional dative and double-object constructions, and suggests that the dative argument in the first and the indirect object in the second are both products of AffP. The chapter also argues that Affectee is merged later than Theme in the Universal Order of Merge (UOM), and then contrasts Affectee with Goal, a superficially similar but quite distinct secondary argument introduced in the UOM after Ag but before Th. It furthermore discusses benefactive AffPs, marked with the preposition for, and shows that they must be distinguished, in a parallel fashion, from Benefactive, another secondary argument which is also merged between Ag and Th. In addition, the chapter looks at possessors of verbs of possession and experiencers of psychological predicates, and considers how these various arguments are realized in Russian. It concludes with a discussion of scope and how it provides a new source of evidence in support of the UOM.