A New Argument for Lexical Decomposition
Transparent Readings of Verbs
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 4918308 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Cable (0000-0002-8934-3194, University of Massachusetts Amherst, corresponding author), Seth Cable |
| Year | 2011 |
| Volume | 42 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 131-138 |
| Publication date | 2011-01-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Linguistic Inquiry (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0024-3892 • E-ISSN: 1530-9150 |
| Publisher | MIT Press - Journals (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1162/ling_a_00031 |
| OpenAlex | W2076402864 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 3 |
Percus (2000) has argued that subordinate verbs do not admit of transparent (de re) readings. In this squib, I will argue that such verbs in English do admit of a kind of transparent reading. Furthermore, this particular reading suggests that, at some level of syntactic and/or semantic analysis, verbs must be decomposed into a primitive action predicate (i.e., "do") and a nominal argument describing the action performed. That is, this reading suggests that a verb like "dance" must be semantically decomposed as a complex predicate "do dancing". In order to keep my discussion here brief, I will presuppose some familiarity with Percus (2000), as well as the kind of situation-semantic framework he assumes (cf. Kratzer 2008). In the following section, I introduce the reading of interest
Argument (complex analysis) · Citation · Download · Icon · Information retrieval · Linguistics · Programming language · World Wide Web · Computer Science · Discourse Analysis in Language Studies · Natural Language Processing Techniques · Philosophy · Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
| Citations per year | 0.2 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2021 - 2021 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |