5.2.1
I propose that spatial interpretation in VP/vp and temporal interpretation in TP/CP is based on a single Formal Feature of lexical items. More precisely, every lexical item bears an abstract number feature [þ/ plural] construed as an Aktionsart (Akt) feature [þ/ EXT(ended)] which translates lexical con- tent in terms of extension in space or time. In vP, a verb or preposition with a [þpl]/[þEXT] Akt F deWnes a situation which extends in space, while a predicate with a [ pl]/[ EXT] Akt F deWnes a situation located on a point in space. Verbs like swim or write have a [þpl]/ [þEXT] Akt F because they denote a plurality of physical gestures; verbs like sit or lie have a [þpl]/ [þEXT] Akt F because they denote a plurality of points in space. A verb with a [ pl]/[ EXT] Akt F, such as notice, arrive, or know, deWnes a situation placed on a single point in space.
While V and P may have a [þEXT] or a [ EXT] Akt F, all nominals have a [þEXT] Akt F. A nominal inherently deWnes a space within the discourse world over which its referent extends: this is a physical space for ‘book’, a mental space for ‘idea’, and a psychological space for ‘love’, for example.
Following Verkuyl’s (1972) discussion of the temporal content of VP, which I translate as spatial content, I assume that a complex VP has a derived Akt F obtained by calculating the values of the lexical predicates it contains.
On the TP level, where vþV are merged with T by movement or construal, a vP with a [þEXT] Akt F deWnes a situation which extends in time, while a vP with a [ EXT] Akt F deWnes a situation located on a point of time. A swimming event is here construed as extended in time as well as in space (John swam for hours) while an arrival event is placed on a point in time as well as in space (John arrived at ten o’clock).
5.2.2
I propose that the lexical material in vP and TP is organized and placed in space and time by an external argument located at the periphery of each syntactic phase.
5.2.2.1 A VP with a [þpl]/[þEXT] akt F selects a nominal in Spec vP which checks its abstract [þpl]/[þEXT] F akt F with the abstract [þpl.] nb. F of v.1 This nominal plays the role of a purely spatial subject: it is construed as a body which delimits the physical extension of the conWguration VP denotes and which anchors it in the discourse space. If VP is complex, i.e. if it describes a series of gestures or the change of place of an object, then the subject in Spec vP also functions as a Manipulator. With the aid of an Instrument, often its body part, the Manipulator eVects the spatial conWguration VP describes. Thus, the VP in (8a) selects a Manipulator in Spec vP in (8b) whose arm is the instrument which eVects the putting event.
(8) a. [VP put [PP the milk in the refrigerator] ]
b. [vP John [VP put [PP the milk in the refrigerator] ]]
In (8b) the Manipulator argument, John, is overt, while the Instrument, his arm, is covert. In (9a), both Manipulator and Instrument are overt. In (9b), the instrument appears in Spec vP while the Manipulator is implied by the conceptually based construal mechanism of metonymy.
(9) a. [vP John [VP opened the door with the key] ] b. [vP the key [VP opened the door] ]
A VP with a [ EXT] Akt F does not select a subject in Spec vP, for it deWnes no complex spatial conWguration which needs a subject to delimit it and no gestures which a body part or other Instrument must eVect. The VP in (10)
1 The abstract [þpl.] nb. F construed as an Aktionsart F is not to be confused with the [þpl.] phi F of a nominal. The Akt F determines whether the nominal takes up space, not whether it refers to more than one individual.
describes a punctual contact between a Figure (quelqu’un) and the deictic Ground implied by the verb arriver.
(10) [VP arrive quelqu’un]
I claim that auxiliary selection is determined by the presence or absence of a Manipulator in Spec vP. A [þEXT] vP with an external spatial argument selects auxiliary have while a [ EXT] VP with no argument in Spec vP selects be.
(11) a. Jean/La cle´ a ouvert la porte.
(John/The key has opened the door.) b. Il est venu quelqu’un.
(It is arrived someone—someone has arrived.)
5.2.2.2 When V þ v merge with T in the TP domain, the situation vP describes is placed in the time interval which T denotes. A vP with a [þEXT] Akt F selects an external argument in Spec TP which checks its temporal feature with the tense F of T. Lecarme (1996; 2004) shows that D can contain a morphological tense feature in Somali. More often, I propose, the person feature of a nominal functions as its tense feature. When D checks a person F with the tense F of T, the DP it heads is selected for the minimal temporal properties necessary to satisfy (1). DP is assigned a biography which situates it in the Reference time interval associated with the CP domain, which includes the Event time interval associated with T. The DP is also selected for psychological properties which allow it to place an event in time, in particular the property of intension, which enables it to function as Trigger of the Event and as the T(ense)-Controller which maintains the event in time. Just as a nominal which checks an abstract [þpl] Akt F in Spec vP anchors the conWguration VP denotes in space, so a nominal which checks a [þperson] temporal F in Spec TP anchors the event vP denotes in time. The psychological properties of the T-controller may be likened to the Instrument of the Ma- nipulator: they eVect the organization of material in time as the Instrument organizes it in space.
An external argument is selected for properties determined both by the lexical content of the predicate and by its own syntactic position. Only an argument which takes scope over VP can be construed as Manipulator, and only an argument which takes scope over T can be construed as Trigger and T-controller of the event.
A second argument checks person in T. This is the Experiencer, which, in the languages cited in 5.1.2.2. above, raises to T from a high v projection.
Because the Experiencer argument lacks the high syntactic scope needed to function as Trigger and T-controller of the event, it is not selected for the intentional property which underlies these functions. However, when it checks its person F in T, the Experiencer nevertheless acquires temporal properties, a biography which places it in the time of the discourse world previous to the event time, and the minimal psychological property of perceptiveness. The Experiencer functions as a speciWc kind of T-controller: it maintains an event in time by perceiving it. An event which does not take up time cannot license an Experiencer argument.
(12) a. Marie lui prend son livre. (Marie him takes his book.) b. Marie lui admire son livre.
(Marie him admires his book.) c. Marie lui connaıˆt son livre.
(Marie him knows his book.)
5.2.2.3 Spatial and temporal arguments may be overt or covert. In the English middle structure in (13a), the Manipulator argument is implied by the [þEXT] Akt F of the verb and focused by an eVort adverbial; in the reXexive structure in (13b), it is selected by the gestures deWning the [þEXT] predicate. A [ EXT] predicate does not select a Manipulator.
(13) a. (i) This book reads easily. (ii) This book Wnds easily. b. (i) John washed (himself).
(ii) John saw(himself) in the mirror.
We suggest, for concreteness, that English has a strong [þpl] F in v which can license a covert Manipulator, just as many Romance languages have a strong Tense or Person F in T which can license a pro or covert T-controller.
The covert external argument in the passive participle in (14) is construed as a Manipulator when the by-phrase is construed in spatial terms in vP, and as a Trigger and T-controller when it is construed in temporal terms in TP.
(14) John was beaten (by Bill).
A temporal argument may not be covert in a Wnite sentence, however. As the contrast between French (15a), where a se morpheme bears the person F, and English (15b), which lacks such a morpheme, shows, a purpose adverbial
cannot compensate for the absence of a morpheme with a person F function- ing as T-controller of the event.
(15) a. Ce livre se lit (pour accumuler les connaissances). b. This book reads (in order to accumulate knowledge).
5.2.3
I thus eliminate holistic theta-role features assigned to a predicate in the lexicon, which select an Agent or a Patient argument in syntax, in favour of fragmentary event functions or roles which select an argument in one or more syntactic phases. Aktionsart functions like Manipulator are assigned in VP or vP, while aspectual functions like Trigger, T-controller, and Experiencer are assigned in TP. These event roles are required by Constraint (1) to mediate between the description of an event and the placing of the event in discourse space and time. As these roles are predictable from the Akt F of the lexical predicate as it is construed in each syntactic phase, they need not, and cannot, be listed in the verb’s lexical entry.
It is important to point out that the fragmentary event roles I posit are empirically superior to holistic theta-roles. The theta-role Agent combines three elementary event functions—those of Manipulator, Trigger, and T-controller—each of which is assigned in diVerent syntactic contexts and can occur independently of the others.
For example, the English middle in (13a) selects only a Manipulator in vP, while the French middle in (15a) selects a Trigger and a T-controller as well. However, if the tense is episodic rather than generic, in French the verb can assign only a Trigger function to the se morpheme, while in Spanish, it can assign the T-controller function as well, as the contrast between (16b) and (17b) shows.
(16) a. Cela s’est dit hier. (Trigger)
(That self said yesterday—that was said yesterday.) b. Les pommes se sont mange´es hier. (T-controller)
(The apples self ate yesterday—the apples were eaten yesterday.) (17) a. Este se dijo ayer. (Trigger)
This SELF said yesterday. ‘This was said yesterday.’
b. Las manzanas se comieron ayer. (T-controller) The apples SELF ate yesterday.
If the se morpheme in (17b) is associated with the theta-role Agent, what should we call the se morpheme in (16a) and (17a)? And what theta-role does the implicit subject have in English (13a(i))? There is no conceptual problem if Agent is simply an umbrella term for a syntactic argument which receives the three fragmented event roles which the subject of diVerent syntactic domains may assume.
Similarly, causative make, which has a [ EXT] Akt F, can assign the Trigger function, but not the T-controller function, to its subject. But causative have, which has a [þEXT] Akt F, assigns the T-controller role in the same context which can only be satisWed by a human subject which checks its person F in Spec TP.
(18) a. John made [Mary Wx the sink]. j [ EXT] j
Trigger Manipulator
b. The bad weather made Mary change her plans. (19) a. John had Mary Wx the sink.
j [þEXT] j
T-controller Manipulator
b. The bad weather had Mary change her plans.