Re: Theta role?
|From:||Dirk Elzinga <dirk_elzinga@...>|
|Date:||Wednesday, December 15, 2004, 18:32|
On Dec 14, 2004, at 7:41 PM, Tristan Mc Leay wrote:
> On 15 Dec 2004, at 1.22 pm, Thomas R. Wier wrote:
>> And wrote:
>>> Tom Wier:
>>>> there's almost no agreement on how many theta
>>>> roles exist, even among grammarians who practice within the same
>>>> theoretical framework. IMO, three is the best bet, since to my
>>>> knowledge there are no languages where an underived verb takes
>>>> more than three arguments,
>>> I'll bet you plenty that in English at least one verb seems to
>>> take four arguments...
>> Perhaps I should have been clearer. I was talking about verbs
>> which take four *NP* arguments. On some analyses, English verbs
>> like 'buy' and 'sell' take four arguments, but one of those must,
>> in every dialect I know of, be prepositional. These constructions
>> in Georgian and Abkhaz on the contrary involve four NP arguments.
>> (I can't speak for Abkhaz, but in Georgian the constructions
>> alternate with variants having a postposition for the fourth
> I think And was talking about a particular special case of anadewism,
> eadewism (or aeadewism), '(an) English's already dunnit even worse'.
No. And was playing with the verb 'bet', which according to some
analyses takes four arguments.
"I believe that phonology is superior to music. It is more variable and
its pecuniary possibilities are far greater." - Erik Satie