Volume 44, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0378-4169
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9927
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



In this paper I claim that Italian and verbs constitute two syntactically distinct classes of verbs. verbs are derived from a noun corresponding to a location, and behave similarly to verbs of caused motion. verbs are derived from a noun corresponding to the located entity, and behave similarly to verbs. Despite these similarities, the derivational structure of and verbs has an impact on their syntactic structure. For this reason and verbs cannot be included in the classes of and verbs, respectively. They deserve a separate classification.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Acedo-Matellán, V. & Real-Puigdollers, C.
    2015 Location and locatum verbs revisited: Evidence from aspect and quantification. Acta Linguistica Humgarica, 62: 2, 111–140. 10.1556/064.2015.62.2.1
    https://doi.org/10.1556/064.2015.62.2.1 [Google Scholar]
  2. Acquaviva, P.
    2008Roots and lexicality in distributed morphology. Ms., UC Dublin.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Alexiadou, A., Anagnostopoulou, E. & Schäfer, F.
    2006The properties of anticausatives crosslinguistically. InM. Frascarelli (Ed.), Phases of Interpretation, 187–212. Berlin: Mouton. 10.1515/9783110197723.4.187
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197723.4.187 [Google Scholar]
  4. 2015External Arguments in Transitivity Alternations. A Layering Approach. Oxford-New York: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199571949.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199571949.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  5. Anderson, S. R.
    1971 On the role of deep structure in semantic interpretation. Foundations of Language, 7, 387–396.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Boons, J-P.
    1971 Métaphore et baisse de la redondance. Langue française, 11, 15–16. 10.3406/lfr.1971.5543
    https://doi.org/10.3406/lfr.1971.5543 [Google Scholar]
  7. 1984Sceller un piton dans le mur, desceller un piton du mur. Pour une syntaxe de la prefixation negative. Langue française, 62, 95–128. 10.3406/lfr.1984.5192
    https://doi.org/10.3406/lfr.1984.5192 [Google Scholar]
  8. 1986 Des verbes ou compléments locatifs « Hamlet » à l’effet du même nom. Revue québécoise de Linguistique, 15: 12, 57–88. 10.7202/602561ar
    https://doi.org/10.7202/602561ar [Google Scholar]
  9. Chierchia, G.
    2004 A semantics for unaccusatives and its syntactic consequences. InA. Alexiadou, E. Anagnostopoulou & M. Everaert (Eds.), The unaccusative puzzle: Explorations of the syntax-lexicon interface, 22–59. Oxford/New York, Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199257652.003.0002
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199257652.003.0002 [Google Scholar]
  10. Clark, E. & Clark, H.
    1979 When nouns surface as verbs. Language, 55, 767–811. 10.2307/412745
    https://doi.org/10.2307/412745 [Google Scholar]
  11. Folli, R.
    2001 Constructing Telicity in English and Italian. PhD dissertation, University of Oxford.
  12. Gilbert Sotelo, E.
    2018 Deriving ablative, privative, and reversative meanings in Catalan and Spanish. Borealis, 7: 2, 161–185. 10.7557/
    https://doi.org/10.7557/ [Google Scholar]
  13. Gross, M.
    1975Méthodes en syntaxe. Paris: Hermann.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. 1995 La notion de lieu argument du verbe. InTendances récentes en linguistique française et générale, volume dédié à David Gaatone, 173–200. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/lis.20.18gro
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lis.20.18gro [Google Scholar]
  15. Grossmann, M. & Rainer, F.
    2004La formazione delle parole in italiano. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110934410
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110934410 [Google Scholar]
  16. Grossmann, M.
    1994Opposizioni direzionali e prefissazione: analisi morfologica e semantica dei verbi egressivi prefissati con des- e es- in catalano. Padova: Unipress.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Guillet, A. & Leclère, C.
    1992La structure des phrases simples en français. Les constructions transitives locatives. Genève/Paris: Droz.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Hale, K. & Keyser, S. J.
    1997 The limits of argument structure. InA. M. Mendikoetxea & M. Uribe-Etxebarria (Eds.), Theoretical issues at the morphology-syntax interface, 203–230. Bilbao/Donostia-San Sebastián: Universidad del País Vasco and Diputación Foral de Gipuzkoa.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. 2002Prolegomenon to a theory of argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/5634.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/5634.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  20. Hale, K.
    1986 Notes on world view and semantic categories: Some Warlpiri examples. InP. Muysken & H. van Riemsdijk (Eds.), Features and projections, 233–254. Dodrecht: Foris. 10.1515/9783110871661‑009
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110871661-009 [Google Scholar]
  21. Harley, H.
    2005 How do verbs get their names? Denominal verbs, manner incorporation and the ontology of verb roots in English. InN. Erteschik-Shir & T. Rapoport (Eds.), The syntax of aspect, 42–64. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199280445.003.0003
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199280445.003.0003 [Google Scholar]
  22. Haspelmath, M.
    1993 More on typology of inchoative/causative verb alternations. InB. Comrie & M. Polinsky (Eds.), Causatives and Transitivity, 87–120. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.23.05has
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.23.05has [Google Scholar]
  23. Haspelmath, M., Calude, A., Spagnol, M., Narrog, H. & Bamyack, E.
    2014 Coding casual-noncasual verb alternations: a from-frequency correspondence explanation. Journal of Linguistics, 50: 3, 587–625. 10.1017/S0022226714000255
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226714000255 [Google Scholar]
  24. Heidinger, S.
    2015 Causalness and the encoding of the causative-anticausative alternation in French and Spanish. Journal of Linguistics, 51: 3, 562–94. 10.1017/S0022226714000607
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226714000607 [Google Scholar]
  25. Iacobini, C.
    2004 Parasintesi. InM. Grossmann & F. Rainer (Eds.), La formazione delle parole in italiano, 166–188. Berlin: De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Ikegami, Y.
    1987 ‘Source’ and ‘Goal’: A case of linguistic dissymmetry. InR. Dirven & G. Radden (Eds.), Concept of Case, 122–146. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Ishibashi, M.
    2012 The expressions of ‘putting’ and ‘taking’ events in Japanese: The asymmetry of Source and Goal revisited. InA. Kopecka & B. Narasimhan (Eds.), Events of Putting and Taking. A crosslinguistic perspective, 253–272. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/tsl.100.17ish
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.100.17ish [Google Scholar]
  28. Jackendoff, R.
    1990Semantic Structures. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. 1991 Parts and boundaries. Cognition, 41, 9–45. 10.1016/0010‑0277(91)90031‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(91)90031-X [Google Scholar]
  30. Kayne, R. S.
    1975French Syntax. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Kiparsky, P.
    1997 Remarks on Denominal Verbs. InA. Alsina, J. Bresnan & P. Sells (Eds.), Complex Predicates, 473–499. Palo Alto, CA: CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Kopecka, A. & Narasimhan, B.
    2012Events of Putting and Taking: A crosslinguistic perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/tsl.100
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.100 [Google Scholar]
  33. Labelle, M.
    1992 La structure argumentale des verbes locatifs à base nominale. Lingvisticæ Investigationes, XV: 1, 267–315. 10.1075/li.16.2.03lab
    https://doi.org/10.1075/li.16.2.03lab [Google Scholar]
  34. 2000 The semantic representation of denominal verbs. InP. Coopmans, M. Everaert & J. Grimshaw (Eds.), Lexical specification and insertion, 215–240. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.197.11lab
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.197.11lab [Google Scholar]
  35. Lakusta, L. & Landau, B.
    2005 Starting at the end: The importance of goals in spatial language, Cognition, 96, 1–33. 10.1016/j.cognition.2004.03.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2004.03.009 [Google Scholar]
  36. Landau, B.
    2010 Paths in language and cognition: Universal asymmetries and their cause. InG. Marotta, A. Lenci, L. Meini & F. Rovai (Eds.), Space in language, 73–94. Pisa: Edizioni ETS.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Levin, B. & Rappaport Hovav, M.
    1995Unaccusativity. At the Syntax-Lexical Semantics Interface. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. 1998 Morphology and Lexical Semantics. InA. Spencer & A. Zwicky (Eds.), The Handbook of Morphology. Oxford/Malden: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Levin, B.
    1993English Verb Classes and Alternations: A Preliminary Investigation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Mateu, J.
    2001 On the relational semantics of transitive denominal verbs. InM. L. Jungl, O. F. Soriano & M. V. E. Vidal (Eds.), Current issues in generative grammar, 143–164. Alcalá de Henares: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Alcalá.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. 2002 Argument structure. Relational construal at the syntax-semantics interface. Doctoral dissertation. Bellaterra: Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. seneca.uab.cat/clt/publicacions/tesis/index.html
  42. 2008 Argument structure and denominal verbs. Paper presented at theWorkshop on Bare Singulars, Argument Structure, and Their Interpretation, December 11–12, 2008, Bellaterra: Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Nam, S.
    2004 Goal and Source: Their Syntactic and Semantic Asymmetry, Proceedings of the 30th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 1–29. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society. 10.3765/bls.v30i1.940
    https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v30i1.940 [Google Scholar]
  44. Nedyalkov, V. P. & Silnitsky, G. G.
    1973 The Typology of Morphological and Lexical Causatives. InF. Kiefer (Ed.), Trends in Soviet Theoretical Linguistics, 18, 1–32. Dordrecht: Reidel. 10.1007/978‑94‑010‑2536‑2_1
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-2536-2_1 [Google Scholar]
  45. Pinker, S.
    1989Learnibility and cognition: The acquisition of argument structure. Cambridge. MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Rapaport, T.
    2012 Central coincidence: The Preposition With. InJ.-M. Merle & A. Steuckardt (Eds.), Prépositions & Aspectualité, 159–173. Paris: Ophrys.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Rappaport Hovav, M.
    2014 Lexical content and context: The causative alternation in English revisited. Lingua, 141, 8–29. 10.1016/j.lingua.2013.09.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2013.09.006 [Google Scholar]
  48. Reinhart, T.
    2002 The Theta System – An Overview. Theoretical Linguistics, 28, 229–90.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Schäfer, F.
    2009 The Causative Alternation. Language and Linguistics Compass, 3: 2, 641–81. 10.1111/j.1749‑818X.2009.00127.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2009.00127.x [Google Scholar]
  50. Schäfer, F. & Vivanco, M.
    2015 Reflexively marked anticausatives are not semantically reflexive. InE. O. Aboh, J. C. Schaeffer & P. Sleeman (Eds.), Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2013: Selected papers from ‘Going Romance’ Amsterdam 2013, 203–220. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/rllt.8.11sch
    https://doi.org/10.1075/rllt.8.11sch [Google Scholar]
  51. Talmy, L.
    1985 Lexicalization Patterns: Semantic Structure in Lexical Forms. InT. Shopen (Ed.), Language Typology and Syntactic Description III: Grammatical Categories and the Lexicon, 57–149. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. 1991 Path to Realization: A Typology of Event Conflation. Berkeley Linguistics Society, 17, 480–519. 10.3765/bls.v17i0.1620
    https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v17i0.1620 [Google Scholar]
  53. 2000Toward a Cognitive Semantics, II: Typology and process in concept structuring. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Vietri, S.
    2017Usi verbali dell’italiano: le frasi anticausative. Roma: Carocci.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. 2020 The Lexicon of Transitive Verbs of Motion and the Asymmetry Between Goal and Source PPs, International Journal of Linguistics, 12: 6, 81–115. 10.5296/ijl.v12i6.17808
    https://doi.org/10.5296/ijl.v12i6.17808 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): croisés verbs; denominal verbs; location verbs; locatum verbs; standard verbs
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error