Earticle

초록

영어

As noted by Simpson (1983), a resultative predicate can only be predicated of the underlying object. Levin and Rappaport Hovav (1995) generalized it as the Direct Object Restriction (DOR). Recently, Wechsler (1997, 2001) argues that the DOR is factually incorrect by citing some counter-examples to the DOR, and that this phenomenon turns out to be purely semantic after all. Despite Wechsler’s (1997, 2001) claims to the contrary, this paper aims to show the validity of syntactic approach to the DOR effects. Particularly, this paper concentrates on showing that Wechsler’s (1997, 2001) counter-examples are correctly explained under the DOR without relying on his semantic constraints. Rather, this paper argues that the DOR effects can be captured by proposing a proper syntactic structure. This paper proposes that a resultative is formed by a verb’s taking of a resultative SC complement, which is composed of a resultative predicate and its semantic subject DP. This proposal is based on another proposal that, in a resultative, the postverbal DP is a derived object just like an ECM object, and it is derived by movement from the resultative SC complement to the Spec of VP.

목차

I. Introduction
 2. Preliminaries
 3. Against Wechsler’s Objection to DOR
 4. Syntactic Derivation of DOR Effects
 5. Concluding Remarks
 Works Cited
 Abstract

키워드

결과구문의 직접목적어 제약 결과구문 결과구 술어 의미제약 통사구조 결과구 소절보문 도출 목적어 the DOR resultative construction resultative predicate semantic constraints syntactic structure resultative SC complement derived object

저자

• Lee, Chang-Su [ 이창수 | Youngdong University ]

참고문헌

발행기관

간행물