English resultatives : a force-recipient account /

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Main Author:	Iwata, Seizi (Author)
Corporate Author:	ProQuest (Firm)
Format:	Electronic eBook
Language:	English
Published:	Amsterdam ; Philadelphia : John Benjamins Publishing Company, [2020]
Series:	Constructional approaches to language ; v. 26.
Subjects:	English language > Verb phrase. English language > Resultative constructions.
Online Access:	Connect to this title online (unlimited simultaneous users allowed; 325 uses per year)

Table of Contents:

Machine generated contents note: ch. 1 Introduction
1.1. What this book is about
1.1.1. What are resultatives
1.1.2. Two questions raised by resultatives with non-subcategorized objects
1.2. How resultatives have been analyzed in Generative Grammar
1.2.1. Small clause analysis
1.2.2. Lexical rule approach
1.3. How resultatives have been analyzed in Construction Grammar
1.3.1. Goldberg (1995)
1.3.2. Boas (2003)
1.3.3. Short summary
1.4. analysis to be proposed in this book
1.4.1. How to answer the two questions
1.4.2. lexical-constructional approach
1.4.3. Methodology
1.4.4. Terminology
1.5. Organization of the book
pt. I force-recipient account
ch. 2 status of the post-verbal NP
2.0. Introduction to Part I
2.1. Toward the constructional meaning of resultatives
2.1.1. Boas (2003) once again
2.1.2. Three possible paraphrases
2.1.3. Problems with the first and second approaches
2.1.4. Force-recipient account
2.2. How force is transmitted
2.2.1. Wipe the crumbs off the table
2.2.2. Virtual pushing
2.3. Further illustrations of virtual actions
2.3.1. Push oneself to one's feet
2.3.2. Laugh
off the stage
2.3.3. Sneeze
out
2.4. Discourse patient?
2.5. Conclusion
ch. 3 Force transmission as essential to resultatives
3.0. Introduction
3.1. Subcategorized object cases
3.1.1. Post-verbal NP as force-recipient
3.1.2. Types offeree
3.2. Verbal force as relativized to the result state
3.3. Non-subcategorized object cases again
3.3.1. So-called "unaccusative/unergative" distinction
3.3.2. Types of force, not types of participant roles
3.4. Intransitive resultatives based on intransitive verbs
3.5. Conclusion
pt. II So-called idiomatic cases
ch. 4 He laughed his head off
4.0. Introduction to Part II
4.1. V one's head off
4.1.1. Why does his head move off?
4.1.2. Force dynamics of `V one's head off'
4.1.3. Network of `V one's head off'
4.2. Two layers of meaning
4.3. Other related constructions
4.3.1. V one's eyes out
4.3.2. V one's heart out
4.3.3. V one's guts out
4.3.4. V one's lungs out
4.3.5. V one's socks off and V one's butt off
4.4. Discussion
ch. 5 They beat the hell out of me
5.0. Introduction
5.1. construction which beat the hell out of is related to
5.1.1. Perek (2016)
5.1.2. `Beat
out of' construction
5.2. Five types of beat
out of
5.2.1. `Content coming out of a container' type
5.2.2. `Get rid of' type
5.2.3. `Get by coercion' type
5.2.4. `Physiological effect' type and `emotional effect' type
5.2.5. What the three schemas tell us
5.3. From beat the hell out of to `V the hell out of'
5.3.1. Beat the hell out of as the `emotional effect' type
5.3.2. From literal meaning to intensifier meaning
5.3.3. Polysemy network of `V the hell out of'
5.3.4. Interim conclusion
5.4. `V the shit out of' and `V the daylights out of'
5.4.1. Which types do beat the shit out of and beat the daylights out of belong to?
5.4.2. Polysemous networks of `V the daylights out of' and `V the shit out of'
5.5. Possible origins of `V
out of' idioms
5.5.1. Beat the devil out of
5.5.2. Beat the stuffing out of
5.6. `V the life out of'
5.7. Two types of complement alternation
5.7.1. To death and shitless
5.7.2. Out of one's wits
5.8. Conclusion
pt. III Resultatives and domains
ch. 6 Resultatives with verbs of eating and drinking I
6.0. Introduction to Part III
6.1. How to analyze resultatives with eat and drink
6.1.1. Croft (2009)
6.1.2. More on the three phases
6.1.3. Complex causal chains for eat
6.1.4. Eat
clean and eat oneself full
6.2. Eat oneself AP/PP
6.2.1. Eat themselves out of a food supply
6.2.2. Eat oneself to death
6.3. Drink oneself AP/PP
6.3.1. Drink oneself beautiful
6.3.2. Drink oneself silly
6.3.3. Drink oneself to death
6.4. Result states as relativized to the domains
6.5. Summary and conclusion
ch. 7 Resultatives with verbs of eating and drinking II
7.0. Introduction
7.1. Eat
out of house and home
7.1.1. caribou eat themselves out of house and home
7.1.2. He ate me out of house and home
7.2. Drink
under the table
7.2.1. Two domains involved
7.2.2. "beating" sense as primary
7.3. Summary
7.4. Conclusion
ch. 8 He laughed himself silly
8.0. Introduction
8.1. `V oneself silly'
8.1.1. Jackendoff (1997)
8.1.2. What does it mean to become "silly" as a result of laughing?
8.1.3. Short-lived result state
8.1.4. Other instances of `V oneself silly'
8.2. `V oneself stupid'
8.3. `V oneself sick'
8.4. Summary
8.5. Conclusion
pt. IV `Change verb' resultatives and how to accommodate them
ch. 9 `Change verb' resultatives
9.0. Introduction to Part IV
9.1. Weak resultatives and spurious resultatives
9.1.1. Pustejovsky (1991a)
9.1.2. Washio (1997)
9.1.3. Further characteristics of `change verb' resultatives
9.2. How change verb' resultatives are to be analyzed
9.2.1. What is the host of predication?
9.2.2. Unifying `change verb' resultatives with ordinary resultatives
9.3. Resultative caused-motion counterparts
9.3.1. Break the egg into the pan
9.3.2. Empty the tank into the sink
9.4. Still another issue raised by `change verb' resultatives
9.4.1. Result phrase-addition analysis
9.4.2. Result phrase construction
9.4.3. Summary
9.5. Conclusion
ch. 10 What are spurious resultatives?
10.0. Introduction
10.1. Putative characteristics of spurious resultatives
10.2. Thinly
10.2.1. Adverbs that refer to a theme entity
10.2.2. Spread
thinly, cut
thinly
10.2.3. distinction between thin and thinly
10.3. Tight/tightly and loose/loosely
10.3.1. When the alternation is really possible
10.3.2. What does it mean to be tight?
10.3.3. Pull
tight vs. pull
tightly
10.3.4. Force persistence
10.3.5. Loose vs. loosely
10.4. Conclusion
ch. 11 Resultatives with open/shut
11.0. Introduction
11.1. How a door becomes open/shut
11.1.1. Resultative caused-motion?
11.1.2. Co-occurrence of motion and change of state
11.1.3. Internalized translational motion
11.1.4. Co-extensiveness between change of state and internalized translational motion
11.2. Three types of open/shut expressions
11.2.1. Type 1
11.2.2. Type 2
11.2.3. Type 3
11.3. What the existence of the three types tells us
11.3.1. Washio's (1997) three types again
11.3.2. Why open may appear in all the three types of resultatives
11.3.3. unified analysis under the force-recipient account
11.4. Functional open
11.5. Conclusion
pt. V On the result component
ch. 12 To result phrases vs. into result phrases
12.0. Introduction to Part V
12.1. To a whisper
12.1.1. Point on a scale
12.1.2. Other similar cases
12.2. To death
12.2.1. Endpoint of a path
12.2.2. Short summary
12.3. Into a coma
12.4. To pieces vs. into pieces
12.4.1. Corpus data
12.4.2. Different aspects of becoming "pieces"
12.4.3. Other expressions for decomposition
12.5. In/Into alternation
12.5.1. In result phrase
12.5.2. Parallel with spatial paths
12.6. Conclusion
ch. 13 Adjectival result phrases vs. prepositional result phrases
13.0. Introduction
13.1. Previous analyses
13.1.1. matter of conventionalization?
13.1.2. Tsuzuki (2003a, 2003b)
13.1.3. Problems with Tsuzuki (2003a, 2003b)
13.2. difference between an AP and a to-PP
13.2.1. Aspectual integration of the verbal event and the change of state
13.2.2. AP only' cases
13.2.3. `To-PP only' cases
13.2.4. Shoot
dead vs. shoot
to death
13.3. Differences between APs, to-PPs, and into-PPs
13.3.1. Into-PPs
13.3.2. Summary
13.4. How the choice of result phrases is really to be accounted for
13.4.1. Tsuzuki's (2003a, 2003b) proposal once again
13.4.2. Verspoor's (1997) data once again
13.5. Implications for the force-recipient account
13.6. Conclusion
ch. 14 Consequences of the AP/PP distinction
14.0. Introduction
14.1. Aspectual constraint
14.1.1. Immediate result or not?
14.1.2. APs and PPs behave differently
14.1.3. Prepositional result phrases vs. path result phrases
14.2. She cried herself to sleep
14.2.1. Enabling causation
14.2.2. How to enable someone to sleep
14.2.3. How to enable oneself to sleep
14.2.4. Enabling causation in force dynamics
14.3. Conclusion
pt. VI Still further issues surrounding adjectival result phrases
ch. 15 Maximal end-point constraint reconsidered
15.0. Introduction to Part VI
15.1. Wechsler (2005a, 2005b)
15.2. Problems
15.3. Well-behaved data?
15.3.1. Wechsler (2012, 2015)
15.3.2. "well-behaved" data as an illusion
15.4. What is wrong with the maximal end-point constraint?
15.5. Conclusion
ch. 16 Selectional restrictions on adjectival result phrases
16.0. Introduction
16.1. Subcategorized object cases
16.1.1. How the result state is brought about
16.1.2. Not a direct result but a consequence
Contents note continued: 16.2. Wipe
wet
16.2.1. wiping force once again
16.2.2. When and why wipe
wet is possible
16.3. Fake object cases
16.3.1. Goldberg (1995), Vanden Wyngaerd (2001)
16.3.2. Where the apparent delimited endpoint comes from
16.4. Conclusion
ch. 17 Temporal dependence reconsidered
17.0. Introduction
17.1. Rappaport Hovav & Levin (2001)
17.1.1. Two types of resultatives
17.1.2. Temporal coextensiveness
17.2. Temporal dependence is only part of the story
17.2.1. Problems with Rappaport Hovav & Levin (2001)
17.2.2. real difference between wriggle free and wriggle oneself free
17.2.3. Kick free
17.2.4. When the subevents are temporally co-extensive
17.3. Croft (2012)
17.3.1. Integrating force-dynamic and aspectual representations of event structure
17.3.2. Modifications needed
17.4. Conclusion
pt. VII Resultatives that are not based on force-transmission
ch. 18 Princess Anne rides to victory
18.0. Introduction to Part VII
18.1. To victory
18.1.1. Direct Object Restriction
18.1.2. Violation of the Direct Object Restriction
18.1.3. Apparent puzzle of to victory
18.2. To victory as a goal-achieving path
18.2.1. Why the Direct Object Restriction holds
18.2.2. Goal-like characteristics
18.2.3. Change of state that is based on a metaphor
18.2.4. Caused motion vs. simple motion
18.3. Further instances of changes of state effected by metaphorical changes of location
18.3.1. To success
18.3.2. To exhaustion
18.4. Changes of state which are effected by physical changes of location
18.4.1. To safety and to freedom
18.4.2. Out of sight
18.5. Conclusion
ch. 19 Resultatives with free
19.0. Introduction
19.1. Does free denote an endpoint?
19.1.1. `Free as expressing an endpoint' thesis
19.1.2. Problems
19.2. `V
free'
19.2.1. How to cause something to become free
19.2.2. Free vs. to freedom
19.2.3. Resultatives based on self-initiated force
19.3. Cut
free
19.3.1. Apparent puzzle
19.3.2. `Separation'-cut
19.3.3. Cut
free as a `change verb' resultative
19.3.4. Putative restriction
19.4. Conclusion
pt. VIII Putative resultatives
ch. 20 Follow and disappear
20.0. Introduction
20.1. Follow him out of the room
20.1.1. Another apparent counter-example to the Direct Object Restriction
20.1.2. Follow as a motion verb
20.1.3. Further-specifying path PPs
20.2. Other approaches
20.2.1. Rappaport Hovav & Levin (2001)
20.2.2. Goldberg & Jackendoff (2004)
20.3. Disappear down the road
20.3.1. Goldberg & Jackendoff (2004)
20.3.2. Disappear as a motion verb
20.3.3. How to become invisible
20.3.4. Whose visual field?
20.4. Conclusion
ch. 21 Verbs of sound emission followed by a path PP
21.0. Introduction
21.1. Previous analyses
21.1.1. Levin & Rappaport Hovav (1995, 96, 99)
21.1.2. Goldberg & Jackendoff (2004)
21.1.3. Meaning shift or construction?
21.2. `Motion-describing' type
21.2.1. Parallel between manner and sound
21.2.2. Further parallels
21.3. `Motion-induced' type
21.3.1. Two types of sound emission
21.3.2. Motion-describing' type vs. `motion-induced' type
21.4. More on the distinction
21.5. Where there is a sound, there should be a motion
21.6. Verbs of sound emission followed by open/shut
21.6.1. Levin & Rappaport Hovav (1995)
21.6.2. fundamental problem
21.6.3. sound-emission event as describing an internalized translational motion
21.6.4. Functional open once again
21.7. Conclusion
ch. 22 Reconsidering the parallel between change of state and change of location
22.0. Introduction
22.1. Putative parallel between change of state and change of location
22.1.1. Transitive cases
22.1.2. Intransitive cases
22.2. Motion expressions
22.3. Resultatives that are based on motion
22.4. Overall picture
22.5. Conclusion
pt. IX Still another putative constraint
ch. 23 Unique path constraint reconsidered
23.0. Introduction
23.1. Unique path constraint
23.1.1. Goldberg (1991a, 1995)
23.1.2. Adjectival result phrases do not denote paths
23.2. Why adjectival result phrases do not co-occur with path PPs
23.2.1. Co-occurrence of more than one result phrase
23.2.2. No special constraint is necessary
23.3. Still another distinction that has been overlooked
23.3.1. Why motion verbs do not co-occur with result phrases
23.3.2. Resultatives based on motion once again
23.4. Conclusion
ch. 24 To one's death
24.1. Another instance of resultative based on motion?
24.2. Why to one's death means what it does
24.3. Contextual modulation
24.4. Conclusion
ch. 25 Summary and conclusion
25.1. Resultative constructions under a force-recipient account
25.2. Answers to the two questions
25.2.1. Answer to the first question
25.2.2. Answer to the second question
25.3. How to arrived the observed syntax
25.4. Cross-linguistic differences
25.5. Final word.

English resultatives : a force-recipient account /

Similar Items