Transitives with inchoative semantics

The paper investigates the semantics and event structure of change-of-state verbs that undergo the causative alternation – specifically, lexical causative verbs and their anti-causative counterparts. Following some of the previous literature, we challenge the traditional decomposition of lexical causatives into a cause event plus a become event. Instead, we argue on the basis of new arguments that both transitive and intransitive verbs of change-of-state involve a single event yielding a result state. Through various tests, we demonstrate that this event-state relation is interpreted as become not only in intransitive anticausatives, but also in lexical causatives with a causer subject and in transitive anticausatives. Only when a lexical causative verb has an agent subject is this event-state relation interpreted as cause. We face, then, a syntax/semantics mismatch: except when an agent subject is present, change-of-state verbs in transitive sentences exhibit ‘intransitive’ (inchoative) semantics: they describe mere changes (become events), just as they do when they are used in intransitive, anticausative sentences. We argue that the distinction between agent and causer subjects is not based on animacy, but rather on the semantic type of the subject participant. Agent subjects (whether animate or inanimate) denote individuals participating in the vP-event (which is a cause event), whereas causer subjects denote eventualities or facts that bring about the vP-event (which is a become event). Our analysis is developed within the framework of Distributed Morphology, in which external arguments are introduced by a Voice projection that combines with the eventive vP, either Agent Voice or Causer Voice (or Expletive Voice present in transitive anticausatives, for which we provide an updated semantics). We treat these Voice heads as syncategorematic expressions, as opposed to categorematic expressions, as the choice of Voice head determines how the event-state relation in the vP is interpreted.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Glossa a journal of general linguistics
Published
2025-03-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.10528
Primary Topic
Intellectual Property Law
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Transitives with inchoative semantics

Glossa a journal of general linguistics
Intellectual Property Law
article

Transitives with inchoative semantics

article en

Abstract

The paper investigates the semantics and event structure of change-of-state verbs that undergo the causative alternation – specifically, lexical causative verbs and their anti-causative counterparts. Following some of the previous literature, we challenge the traditional decomposition of lexical causatives into a cause event plus a become event. Instead, we argue on the basis of new arguments that both transitive and intransitive verbs of change-of-state involve a single event yielding a result state. Through various tests, we demonstrate that this event-state relation is interpreted as become not only in intransitive anticausatives, but also in lexical causatives with a causer subject and in transitive anticausatives. Only when a lexical causative verb has an agent subject is this event-state relation interpreted as cause. We face, then, a syntax/semantics mismatch: except when an agent subject is present, change-of-state verbs in transitive sentences exhibit ‘intransitive’ (inchoative) semantics: they describe mere changes (become events), just as they do when they are used in intransitive, anticausative sentences. We argue that the distinction between agent and causer subjects is not based on animacy, but rather on the semantic type of the subject participant. Agent subjects (whether animate or inanimate) denote individuals participating in the vP-event (which is a cause event), whereas causer subjects denote eventualities or facts that bring about the vP-event (which is a become event). Our analysis is developed within the framework of Distributed Morphology, in which external arguments are introduced by a Voice projection that combines with the eventive vP, either Agent Voice or Causer Voice (or Expletive Voice present in transitive anticausatives, for which we provide an updated semantics). We treat these Voice heads as syncategorematic expressions, as opposed to categorematic expressions, as the choice of Voice head determines how the event-state relation in the vP is interpreted.

Glossa a journal of general linguisticsVol. 10(1)
Utrecht University (NL), Université de Lille (FR), Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 92%
Intellectual Property Law
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Transitives with inchoative semantics · Glossa a journal of general linguistics (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS