Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Question for English Speakers about Secondary Predicates (also posted on ZBB)

From:Jonathan Knibb <jonathan_knibb@...>
Date:Thursday, December 28, 2006, 14:50
Chris Bates wrote:

>>>
If secondary predicates were just a matter of moving adjectives that are in focus out of NPs, then why is this sentence ungrammatical, or odd to say the least? "The man chased the fox brown." <<< Perhaps because there are at least two other competing analyses? - The man chased the fox underground. - The man chased the fox on horseback. I'm not sure whether it's only pragmatic considerations that would decide between the three, or whether syntactic properties of the constituents have a bearing too. Chris also wrote:
>>>
I want people's judgement about the following sentences: (1) The man ate some meat raw. (2) The man ate some raw meat. <<< (2) is unequivocally acceptable for me. My initial feelings on (1) were that it looks odd, but on reflection, I suspect it could sound natural, but only under very specific conditions. Say a husband and wife come into hospital with food poisoning. The doctors discuss the cause: - Did they have anything unusual to eat last night? - Well, they were at a barbecue where everyone cooked their own food. - Did they make sure they cooked everything properly? - Yes, but they didn't cook everything. The man ate some meat raw, without cooking it at all. The word 'some' would be stressed - it doesn't sound grammatical to me unless this is the case. I think 'some meat' here is really a contraction of 'some of the/his meat', so there is still a definite referent buried within the phrase. Hope this helps! Jonathan (native speaker of British English). ==