Skip to main content
Log in

FINE-GRAINED STRUCTURE IN THE EVENTUALITY DOMAIN: THE SEMANTICS OF PREDICATIVE ADJECTIVE PHRASES AND BE

  • Published:
Natural Language Semantics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents an account of the semantics of copular be as displayed in its behaviour in be+AP configurations. I begin by arguing against the Partee/Dowty distinction between a semantically null be of predication and a thematically relevant agentive be, and I propose that there is one semantically relevant verb whose grammatical role is to turn an AP predicate into a verbal one. The denotation of be must thus be a function from denotations of Adjective Phrases to denotation of Verb Phrases. I argue that these denotations are crucially different in kind: verbs (and thus VPs) denote eventualities, which are count entities and which are temporally locatable, while adjectives (and thus APs) denote mass entities, which are states and which are not temporally locatable. Be thus denotes a locating function which maps from the mass to the count domain, and is the analogue of the ‘packaging’ function in the nominal domain. After a comparison between the mass/count distinction in the verbal and nominal domains, I show how this theory accounts for properties of be in small clause and progressive constructions which have hitherto been explained by positing a so-called agentive be.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Bach, E.: 1986, ‘The Algebra of Events’, Linguistics and Philosophy 9, 5–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chierchia, G.: 1984, Topics in the Syntax and Semantics of Indefinites and Gerunds, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chierchia, G.: 1997, ‘Kind Referring Terms’, manuscript, University of Milan. Published in a later version in Natural Language Semantics 6, 334–405, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chierchia, G.: 1998, ‘Plurality of Mass Nouns and the Notion of “Semantic Parameter”’, in S. Rothstein (ed.), Events and Grammar, pp. 53–104. Kluwer, Dordrecht.

  • Condoravdi, C.: 1992, ‘Individual Level Predicates in Conditional Clauses’, manuscript, Stanford University.

  • Davidson, D.: 1967, ‘The Logical Form of Action Sentences’, in Essays on Actions and Events, pp. 105–148. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dowty, D.: 1979, Word Meaning and Montague Grammar, Reidel, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, Y.: 1994, ‘Hebrew Nominal Sentences and the Stage-Individual Level Distinction’, M.A. thesis, Bar-Ilan University.

  • Krifka, M.: 1989, ‘Nominal Reference, Temporal Constitution and Quantification in Event Semantics’, in R. Bartsch, J. van Bentham, and P. van Emde Boas (eds.), Semantics and Contextual Expressions, pp. 75–115. Foris, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krifka, M.: 1992, ‘Thematic Relations as Links between Nominal Reference and Temporal Constitution’, in I. Sag and A. Szabolsci (eds.), Lexical Matters, pp. 29–53. CSLI Publications, Stanford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, G.: 1970, Irregularity in Syntax, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landman, F.: 1991, Structures for Semantics, Kluwer, Dordrecht.

  • Landman, F.: 1992, ‘The Progressive’, Natural Language Semantics 1, 1–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landman, F.: 1999, Events and Plurality, to appear, Kluwer, Dordrecht.

  • Link, G.: 1983, ‘The Logical Analysis of Plurals and Mass Terms: A Lattice Theoretical Approach’, in R. Bäuerle, C. Schwarze, and A. von Stechow (eds.), Meaning, Use and Interpretation of Language, pp. 303–323. De Gruyter, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mittwoch, A.: 1988, ‘Aspects of English Aspect: On the Interaction of Perfect Progressive and Durational Phrases’, Linguistics and Philosophy 11, 203–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moens, M. and M. Steedman: 1988, ‘Temporal Ontology and Temporal Reference’, Computational Linguistics 14(2), 15–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moro, A.: 1997, The Raising of Predicates: Predicative Noun Phrases and the Theory of Clause Structure, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, T.: 1990, Events in the Semantics of English, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Partee, B.: 1977, ‘John is Easy to Please’, in A. Zampolli (ed.), Linguistic Structures Processing, pp. 281–312. North-Holland, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Partee, B.: 1986, ‘Ambiguous Pseudoclefts with Unambiguous “Be”’, in S. Berman et al. (eds.), Proceedings of NELS 16, pp. 354–366, GLSA, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

    Google Scholar 

  • Partee, B.: 1987, ‘Noun Phrase Interpretation and Type Shifting Principles’, in J. Groenendijk and M. Stokhof (eds.), Studies in Discourse Representation Theory and the Theory of Generalized Quantifiers (GRASS 8), pp. 115–143. Foris, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pelletier, F.J.: 1979, ‘Non-Singular Reference’, in F.J. Pelletier (ed.), Mass Terms: Some Philosophical Problems, pp. 1–14. Kluwer, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothstein, S.: 1983, The Syntactic Forms of Predication, PhD dissertation, MIT.

  • Rothstein, S.: 1995a, ‘Adverbial Quantification over Events’, Natural Language Semantics 3, 1–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothstein, S.: 1995b, ‘Pleonastics and the Interpretation of Pronouns’, Linguistic Inquiry 26, 499–529.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothstein, S.: 1998, ‘Progressive Achievements’, manuscript, Bar-Ilan University.

  • Rothstein, S.: 1999, Predicates and Their Subjects, manuscript, Bar-Ilan University. To be published by Kluwer, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, B.: 1919, Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy, Allen and Unwin, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stowell, T.: 1978, ‘What Was There Before There Was There’, in CLS 14, pp. 457–471, Chicago Linguistics Society, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stowell, T.: 1983, ‘Subjects across Clauses’, The Linguistics Review 2, 285–312.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stowell, T.: 1991, ‘Small Clause Restructuring’, in R. Freidin (ed.), Comparative Grammar, pp. 182–218. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vendler, Z.: 1967, Linguistics in Philosophy, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, N.Y.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vlach, F.: 1983, ‘On Situation Semantics for Perception’, Synthese 54, 129–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, E.: 1994, Thematic Structure in Syntax, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zucchi, A.: 1998, ‘Aspect Shift’, in S. Rothstein (ed.), Events and Grammar, pp. 349–370. Kluwer, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zucchi, S. and M. White: 1996, ‘Twigs, Sequences and the Temporal Constitution of Predicates’, in T. Galloway and J. Spence (eds.), Proceedings of SALT 6, pp. 329–346.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rothstein, S. FINE-GRAINED STRUCTURE IN THE EVENTUALITY DOMAIN: THE SEMANTICS OF PREDICATIVE ADJECTIVE PHRASES AND BE. Natural Language Semantics 7, 347–420 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008397810024

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008397810024

Keywords

Navigation