Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-07T21:04:06.093Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Some postulates characterizing volitive NPs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

George L. Dillon
Affiliation:
Indiana University at Fort Wayne

Extract

D. A. Cruse's ‘Some thoughts on agentivity’ (1973: 11–23) makes the useful distinction of [volitive] and [agentive] NPs. Recognizing this difference is the first step in avoiding some of the difficulties encountered by Jackendoff (1972), Fischer and Marshall (1969) and others in their discussion of how an NP is characterized as [volitive] in a clause and how some predicates can characterize an NP in an embedded clause as [volitive]. These discussions have been relatively inconclusive because of the very common assumption that [ ±volitive] or something like it should be represented as a feature of predicates, or predictable from one. If one believes that lexical selectional features are semantic (as McCawley (1968) argues), one arrives at the kind of ‘referential’ criterion for volitivity that Cruse rightly wishes to shun and that other writers have found so dismaying (see e.g. Jackendoff, 1972: 221). The way to avoid this is to suppose that [volitive] is not a ‘feature’ at all, but rather abbreviates an assumption entailed (or ‘presupposed’) by saying certain things. In this way, some sentences can be marked as contradictory, but many will simply seem queer outside of an explicating context, set of special assumptions, and so on. It follows that a great many sentences starred in recent grammatical literature as inherently bad regardless of context ought not to be. We mark: I asked John to be tall.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Boyd, J. C. & Thorne, J. P. (1969). The semantics of modal verbs. JL 5, 5774.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chafe, W. (1970). Meaning and the structure of language. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Cruse, D. A. (1973). Some thoughts on agentivity. JL 9, 1123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, D. & Harman, G. H. (eds.) (1972). Semantics of natural language. Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dillon, G. L. (1973). Perfect and other aspects in a case grammar of English. JL 9, 271279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dowty, D. (1972). On the syntax and semantics of the atomic predicate CAUSE. Papers from the 8th regional meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
Dowty, D. (1972a). Studies in the logic of verb aspect and time reference in English. (University of Texas Studies in Linguistics). Austin: Department of Linguistics, University of Texas.Google Scholar
Fischer, S. D. & Marshall, B. (1969). The examination and abandonment of the theory of begin of D. M. Perlmutter. (Mimeographed). Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. J. (1971). Verbs of judging. In Fillmore, C. J. & Langendoen, D. T. (eds.), Studies in linguistic semantics. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. J. (1971a). Types of lexical information. In Steinberg, D. D. & Jacobovits, L. A. (eds.), Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 370–92.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. J. (1972). Subjects, speakers, and roles. In Davidson & Harman, 1972: 124.Google Scholar
Gordon, D. & Lakoff, G. (1972). Conversational postulates. Papers from the 7th regional meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society. 6384.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, R. S. (1972). Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
Karttunen, L. (1972). Possible and necessary. In Kimball, J. (ed.), Syntax and semantics, Vol. 1. New York: Seminar Press.Google Scholar
King, H. V. (1970). Action and aspect in English verb expressions. LL 20. 118.Google Scholar
Kitagawa, C. (in press). Purpose expressions in English. To appear in Lingua.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1972). Linguistics and natural logic. In Davidson & Harman, 1972: 545665.Google Scholar
Lakoff, R. (1971) Passive resistance. Papers from the 7th regional meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
McCawley, J. D. (1968). The role of semantics in a grammar. In Bach, E. & Harms, R. T., (eds.), Universals in linguistic theory. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Ross, J. R. (1972). Act. In Davidson & Harman, 1972: 70126.Google Scholar