Re: THEORY: Four-valent Clauses
|From:||taliesin the storyteller <taliesin-conlang@...>|
|Date:||Saturday, August 6, 2005, 22:44|
* tomhchappell said on 2005-07-29 20:14:36 +0200
> Thanks for writing, David.
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "David J. Peterson" <dedalvs@G...>
> > wrote:
> > Tom wrote:
> > <<
> >> Is every example of a Four-Argument Verb, in a language with
> >> either
> >> Causatives or Applicatives or both?
> >> Does every Four-Argument Clause come from either Causativizing or
> >> Applicativizing a Ditransitive Clause?
> > >>
> > Umm...no? Isn't something like "rent" a four argument predicate
> > that's neither a causative nor an applicative?
> Not in any language I know about.
> > That is, "I (1) rented
> > you (2) a car (3) for five dollars (4)."
> It is just this kind of transaction that Ray Jackendoff (sp?) says
> is, semantically, a four-place predicate.
> But semantics isn't grammar, as he points out.
Another example used for a four/five-way argument predicate in English is
I(1) bet you(2) five dollars(3) on that dog(4) [to win(5)].
If you don't add in something to stand in for at least 4, 4 needs,
100%, to be supplied by context.
I(1) bet you(2) five dollars(3) on that dog(4).
works too. Actually, it's the 2 that is easily droppable.