States and modification
A reply to Maienborn
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 20364977 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Susan Rothstein (corresponding author) |
| Year | 2005 |
| Volume | 31 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 375-381 |
| Publication date | 2005-11-18 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Theoretical Linguistics (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0301-4428 • E-ISSN: 1613-4060 |
| Publisher | Walter de Gruyter GmbH (PUBLISHER • DE) |
| DOI | 10.1515/thli.2005.31.3.375 |
| OpenAlex | W1981334854 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 5 |
This very interesting paper investigates differences between copula verbs on the one hand, and ‘truly eventive’ verbs, on the other, discussing a number of important topics, including the effect of word order on modification relations, and the difference between internal and external event modification. The core claim of the paper is that states and eventualities have a different logical structure, and that the differences between them follow from this. Rather than commenting directly on the arguments made in the paper, I am going to concentrate in my response on this issue, trying to show that statives and eventualities are more similar than Maienborn assumes, and suggesting that the differences between them might be explained without postulating different logical structures
Epistemology · Event structure · Linguistics · Physics · Programming language · Word order · Computer Science · Linguistics and language evolution · Natural Language Processing Techniques · Philosophy · Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
| Citations per year | 0.45 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2015 - 2025 (11) |
| Highly cited | No |