dc.creator | Mangialavori Rasia, Maria Eugenia | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2020-09-18T20:25:15Z | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2022-10-15T15:31:45Z | |
dc.date.available | 2020-09-18T20:25:15Z | |
dc.date.available | 2022-10-15T15:31:45Z | |
dc.date.created | 2020-09-18T20:25:15Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2019-05 | |
dc.identifier | Mangialavori Rasia, Maria Eugenia; Stativity in the causative alternation? New questions and a new variant; De Gruyter; Open Linguistics; 5; 1; 5-2019; 233-259 | |
dc.identifier | 2300-9969 | |
dc.identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/11336/114364 | |
dc.identifier | CONICET Digital | |
dc.identifier | CONICET | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/4403245 | |
dc.description.abstract | This paper discusses whether capacity to license an internal argument and eventivity are default properties of so-called change-of-state verbs.I draw attention to the claim that, in certain languages, the causative-inchoative alternation extends to a third, external-argument only variant with stative behavior. This variant presents a problem for current generalizations on the Causative Alternation and change-of-state verbs for various reasons, starting from the long-held claim that unique arguments of change-of-state verbs are by default internal. As the causative componentis independently realized in a noneventive, nonepisodic frame, this variant challenges: (a) a widely-agreed rule of event composition, whereby cause, if present, causally implicatesprocess; (b) the claim that CAUSE(R) interpretation of the external argument is a byproduct of transitivization. The discussion: (a) brings out a crosslanguage contrast bearing on default (CAUSE/UNDERGOER) interpretation of unique arguments in equipollent alternations; (b) provides new empirical data supporting the stativity of the (causative) outer v; (c) substantiates important predictions in the literature (e.g. verbs of causation should have stative readings; external-argument-only variants of Object-Experiencer verbs should be found); (d) captures further verb classes allowing the alternation; (e) shows crucial contrasts with other transitive-(in/a)transitive alternations involving null/arb objects. | |
dc.language | eng | |
dc.publisher | De Gruyter | |
dc.relation | info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/opli | |
dc.relation | info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2019-0014 | |
dc.rights | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ar/ | |
dc.rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess | |
dc.subject | UNERGATIVITY | |
dc.subject | INCHOATIVITY | |
dc.subject | TRANSITIVITY | |
dc.subject | CAUSATIVITY | |
dc.subject | ALTERNATION | |
dc.title | Stativity in the causative alternation? New questions and a new variant | |
dc.type | info:eu-repo/semantics/article | |
dc.type | info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo | |
dc.type | info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion | |