Instructor: Adriana Todea

atodea@yahoo.com
Office hours: Friday 12-2 p.m., Alpha Centre room

Introduction to Generative Grammar

Course 2: Unaccusativity and unergativity. Multistratal syntax. The Final
1 Law.
WEEK 2
Outline1

Jane Austen’s work:

(mark perfect auxiliation)

“About a week after their arrival, it became certain that Willoughby was also
arrived.” Sense and Sensibility, Chapter 27

“ ’A letter of proper submission!’ repeated he; ‘would they have me beg my mother’s
pardon for Robert’s ingratitude to her, and breech of honour to me? I can make no
submission – I am grown neither humble nor penitent by what has passed. I am
grown very happy, but that would not interest. I know of no submission that is
proper for me to make.” Sense and Sensibility , Chapter 49

“Elizabeth made no answer, and took her place in the set, amazed at the dignity to
which she was arrived in being allowed to stand opposite to Mr. Darcy, and reading
in her neighbours’ looks, their equal amazement in beholding it.” Pride and
Prejudice , chapter 18

“In the drawing-room Mr. Crawford certainly was; having been just long enough
arrived to be ready for dinner;…” Mansfield Park, Chapter 23

“’ Mrs. R has been spending the Easter with the Aylmers at Twickenham (as to be
sure you know), and is not yet returned; and Julia is with the cousins who live near
Bedford Square, but I forget their name and street.’ ” Mansfield Park, Chapter 45

“They arrived at Bath. Catherine was all eager delight; her eyes were here, there,
everywhere, as they approached its fine and striking environs, and afterwards drove
through those streets which conducted them to the hotel. She was come to be
happy, and she felt happy already.” Northanger Abbey , Chapter 2

to be
Perfect auxiliation
to have

The perfect auxiliary selection in Italian:

Giorgio ha (*è) lavorato. Giorgio è (*ha) sparito.
Giorgio worked. Giorgio disappeared.

1 You find in this outline the content of the slides that I project during the course,
which contain the main topics and also structures and diagrams which may be difficult
and time consuming for you to copy during my lecture. They are made available to you
before class to save time and to make note-taking easier, but not unnecessary!
The outline as such (without your notes covering the detailed explanations that I give
during the course) cannot constitute a sufficient source of information when preparing
for the exam. If you miss the class, it is strongly recommended that this outline be used
as a guide to the bibliography indicated at the end of this document.

Course 2 Page 1
 The perfect auxiliary selection in French:
Je suis (*ai) allé/ tombé/ entré/ sorti/ arrivé/ venu/ parti
J’ai (*suis) passé/ parlé/ mangé.

Italian selects “have” as a perfect auxiliary for all transitive verbs.

Some intransitive verbs select “have” as well, while other intransitive
verbs select “be”. In other words, perfect auxiliary selection in Italian
subcategorizes the intransitive verbs into two subgroups. But their
different syntactic behaviour must spring from some syntactic
difference in their nature.

Transitivity = the verb takes two arguments (S+DO)

[1]
S P D.O.
The boy is painting the wall.

Now build the corresponding wall (D.O.)

participial adjective: the painted or
boy (S)

Rule: A participial adjective (derived from a past participle)

always selects the direct object argument, never the subject.

Ditransitivity (S+DO+IO)
The girl gave the book to the boy yesterday.
Participial adjective = the given....girl….book…..boy…

Intransitivity = the verb takes one argument only (?S or DO?)

If an intransitive verb selects a subject and no object, then, according

to the participial adjective rule above, we shouldn’t be able to build
corresponding participial adjectives derived from intransitive past
participles.

[2]
S P Temp
The man walked all morning. The man walked his dog
Participial adjective: * the walked man the walked dog

[3]
S P
The girl smiled.
Participial adjective: * the smiled girl

[4]
S P Loc
The children are swimming in the pond.
Participial adjective: * the swum children

Course 2 Page 2
 BUT

[5]
?S or DO? P
The prisoner escaped.
Participial adjective: the escaped prisoner

[6]
?S or DO? P
Junk accumulates.
Participial adjective: the accumulated junk

[7]
?S or DO? P
The train arrived.
Participial adjective: the arrived train

The arguments in examples 2,3,4,5,6,7 are in the Nominative case,

which always marks the subject, as it does in the transitive example (1).
Therefore the arguments in the intransitive examples bear the
grammatical relation of subject. But, according to the participial adjective
rule, a participial adjective, derived from a past participle, always selects
an object, never a subject. Which leads to the notion that somehow the
arguments in examples 5,6, and 7 are both subject and object. Such a
syntactic structure is quite common in language, but it is the mark of
reflexivity, and examples 5,6, and 7 are by no means reflexive, either
morphologically or semantically.

Relational grammar (RG) was developed by David Perlmutter and Paul

Postal in the 1970s. It preserves traditional grammar’s fundamental
notions of predicate, subject, object, but it reinterprets them in the new
Chomskian perspective of language as a human biological endowment, a
faculty of the mind, rather than a cultural construct. As well as
Generative grammar, Relational grammar attempts to explain and
describe the inner mechanisms common to all human languages, which
can shed light on how language is acquired, and then generated by the
human brain.
Relational Grammar regards the syntax of the clause as a structure
that consists of several levels, from an initial to a final stratum. Thus,
from this perspective syntax is multistratal. Such a perspective can help
solve the syntactic paradox we encountered in describing intransitivity.
Although the arguments in 5,6, and 7 cannot be S and DO at the same
time, that is at the same syntactic level or stratum (as they are not
reflexive), they can assume the subject and direct object relation in
different syntactic strata. Therefore, the syntactic descriptions in
examples 5,6, and 7 can be rendered as following:

Course 2 Page 3
 [5]
DO P
S P
The prisoner escaped.
Participial adjective: the escaped prisoner

[6]
DO P
S P
Junk accumulates.
Participial adjective: the accumulated junk

[7]
DO P
S P
The train arrived.
Participial adjective: the arrived train

Which means that the predicates ‘escape’, ‘accumulate’, and ‘arrive’

initialise their only argument as direct object, never as subject, whereas
predicates such as ‘swim’, ‘smile’, and intransitive ‘walk’ initialise their
only argument as subject, never as direct object (conclusion confirmed by
the participial adjective test).
In 5,6, and 7 the argument advances from the direct object position
(in the initial stratum) to the subject position (in the final stratum) due to
the Final 1 Law which states that the subject position must be filled in the
final stratum.

Final 1 Law (in GG Extended Projection Rule) is a very powerful

syntactic rule operating universally. Proof of its existence in various
languages is the birth of expletives.

Impersonal structures in English:

P
S P
It rains.

“empty” it = has syntactic function (subject of the sentence,

see agreement marker ‘-s’);
= has phonological form;
= has no referential meaning, it is not a pronoun!
hence “empty” of meaning’;
rain = impersonal verb: takes no argument.

But Final 1 Law requires the presence of a subject in the final

stratum: hence the birth of the expletive ‘it’.

Course 2 Page 4
 Impersonal structures in Romanian

P
S P
(3rd pers sg) Plouă.

silent expletive = has syntactic function (subject of the sentence,

see agreement marker ‘-ă’);
= has no phonological form (hence silent);
= has no referential meaning, it is not a pronoun!

a ploua = impersonal verb: takes no argument.

But Final 1 Law requires the presence of a subject in the final

stratum: hence the birth of the silent expletive in Romanian.

The raising of lower arguments in English to satisfy Final 1 Law.

A good man is hard for a woman to find.

_____hard [a woman to find a good man] hard= impersonal adj.

!!S position is not filled!!  Final 1 Law
generates two possible structures:

--use of expletive to fill S position in the higher clause:

It is hard [for a woman to find a good man.]
or
--raising the lower argument to fill S position in the higher clause:
A good man is hard [for a woman to find.]

Conclusion: The advancement to S position in examples 5,6, and 7 is

generated by the Final 1 Law , and not by the syntactic behaviour of the
predicates ‘escape’, ‘accumulate’, and ‘arrive’.

Both perfect auxiliary selection and participial adjective argument

selection (which is generally called the participial adjective test) clearly
indicate the existence of two distinct subgroups of intransitive verbs.
Relational grammarians were the first to explain the subcategorization of
the intransitive verbs in the following terms:

An unaccusative verb initialises its only argument as direct

object, not as subject. (see the syntactic behaviour of ‘escape’,
‘accumulate’, and ‘arrive’, and therefore such intransitive verbs pass the
participial adjective test)

Course 2 Page 5
 An unergative verb initialises its only argument as subject, not
as direct object. (see the syntactic behaviour of ‘smile’, ‘swim’, and
intransitive ‘walk’, and therefore such intransitive verbs do not pass the
participial adjective test)

Practice: Decide whether the intransitive verbs in the examples below

are unaccusative of unergative.

1. The bed was slept in by the shah.

2. The contestants skied under the bridge.
3. The ice cube melted in the oven.
4. The ingredients united in the test tube.
5. The children jumped on the bed.
6. The camel stepped on the package.
7. Little Red Riding Hood vanished in the woods.

“Be” and “have” perfect auxiliary selection

In explaining perfect auxiliary selection in Italian, syntacticians

observed that the following rule applies:
--transitive and unergative verbs select “have” as a perfect auxiliary;
--unaccusative verbs select “be” as a perfect auxiliary.

In French, this rule is no longer in force: many of the unaccusative

verbs fall under the generalizing rule of “have” auxiliary selection; some
unaccusatives still preserve “be” auxiliary selection as an irregularity due
to extensive usage, rather than a specific syntactic rule.

In Romanian, the standard syntactic rule in forming the analytical

perfect tense is “have” selection. Still, irregular unaccusative “be”
selection still exists alongside “have” selection, which supports the idea
that probably, at some earlier (and unfortunately undocumented) stage
in the development of the Romanian language, unaccusative “be” perfect
auxiliary selection was the rule, as it is still now the case in Italian.
Slight differences in syntactic meaning between coexisting “be” and
“have” variants in Romanian are not surprising, as variation often occurs
to avoid redundancy.

Course 2 Page 6
 unacc unacc unerg unerg
Mama a plecat / a venit/ a mers/ a zâmbit
Mama e plecată/ e venită/ *e mearsă/ *e zâmbită

“Azi am să-ncrestez în grindă –

Jos din cui acum, oglindă!
Mama-i dusă-n sat! Cu dorul …” George Coşbuc “La oglindă”
Mama s-a dus în sat.

The distinction between the two parallel “be” and “have” perfect
auxiliary selection can be interpreted in terms of differences in the
temporal and locative perspective, that is:

Mama e dusă în sat.

“She is not here because she is(has) gone to the village.”
--something happened in the past that has relevance in the present:
she is not here;
--relevant location: the focus is on the location of the speaker:
she is not here.

Mama s-a dus în sat.

“She went to the village.”
--something happened in the past; the time reference is past,
not present;
--relevant location: the focus is on mother’s destination, the village.

Food for thought:

How do you interpret the following non-standard Romanian forms?
Mama a fost dusă-n sat. (with an active, not passive interpretation)
M-am fost dusă până la piaţă.

Course 2 Page 7
 How do you interpret the perfect auxiliation examples selected from
Jane Austen’s novels?

“Willoughby was also arrived.”

“I am grown neither humble nor penitent.”

“I am grown very happy.”

“… (Elizabeth) amazed at the dignity to which she was arrived.”

“… and (Mrs.R.) is not yet returned.”

“She was come to be happy, and she felt happy already.”

Conclusions:
According to the number and syntactic function of arguments they
initialise, verbs subcategorize as follows:
 One argument initialised as subject: unergative verb
Tests: -- fails the participial adjective test;
-- may build pseudopassives in English;
.--.always uses “have” perfect auxiliary selection.

 One argument initialised as direct object: unaccusative verb

Tests: -- passes the participial adjective test;
-- cannot build pseudopassives in English;
.--.uses/may use “be” perfect auxiliary selection.

 Two arguments initialised as subject and direct object: transitive

verb

 Three arguments initialised as subject, direct object, and

indirect object: ditransitive verb

Bibliography:
Blake, Barry J. (1990) Relational Grammar, Routledge
(you can find a copy in the Generative Grammar dossier at the library)
Recommended pages: pp.1-3, pp. 29-37

Course 2 Page 8