Non-Lexical Datives

It is argued that ethical datives and evaluative adverbs have a common deep syntax. Ethical datives surface in a derived position, arguably on a par with datives (DPs and clitics) of all sorts. Likewise, the high position of evaluative adverbs is arguably derived. The unification of the base syntax of evaluative adverbs and ethical datives makes several correct predictions about some core, and otherwise puzzling, syntactic properties of both.

This thesis investigates the syntax of so-called ‘dative’ arguments in Greek and the role of their abstract Case feature in their licensing, from a generative/minimalist perspective. The main claim of the thesis is that dative arguments of all types originate low, i.e. within the maximal projection of the root, in accordance with universal linking principles, and that all apparent variation regarding their surface realisation and their A-/A’- behaviour can be parameterised in terms of their Case feature and the way it is valued. The secondary claims/premises on which the main claim depends are:

(a) a distinction between syntactically inactive and active inherent Case features, which are both possible for dative argument DPs, with purely structural Case being a third possibility cross-linguistically attested; 

(b) the assumption that minimality effects in phi-Agree must be relativised to Case features;

(c) a movement analysis of dative shift (in the spirit of Larson 1988 with no mechanism of theme demotion);

(d) a novel view of applicatives as elements that simply attract dative arguments to their specifier for Case-related reasons, rather than introducing/selecting them. On this view, applicatives are last resort elements and their possible heights of attachment are derivable from the event structure of the predicate. This theory of Appl attachment, coupled with a thematic hierarchy that distinguishes goals from non-goals (and experiencers) with respect to their base position derives the full typology of dative arguments.
In support of these assumptions, this thesis draws on evidence from person restrictions in transitive contexts with datives and beyond (Chapter 2), which seem to be best accounted for if the argument affected by the restriction is treated as a (defective) intervener between the dative and an applicative head; the interference of (different types of) datives themselves with agreement relations in various configurations, in Greek as well as cross-linguistically (Chapter 3); the A-/A’-properties of dative arguments of all types in Greek and Romance and novel diagnostics for unpronounced copies with syntactic or interpretive effects (Chapter 4); the diachronic and cross-dialectal behaviour of dative arguments in Greek (Chapter 5), which confirms some empirical correlations that necessitate the assumptions listed above, most notably the generalisation that both (i) the strong Person Case Constraint, and (ii) minimality effects in Agree across datives imply the availability of active Case on indirect object DPs, which is minimally manifested by the existence of the dative-shifted/double-object construction.

This paper deals with two presentative dative constructions in Modern Hebrew, characterizing them from two angles: as dative constructions and as presentative constructions. It demonstrates that this dual perspective allows to account for both the syntactic and the semantic differences between them.

Одной из специфических, хотя и не уникальных, черт русского языка является наличие моделей предложения, где семантический субъект оформлен дательным
падежом . Наиболее продуктивны трехчастная структурная схема Ndat — Vlink — Pred с дат.п. лица, связкой и именным несогласуемым предикативом (словом Категории
Состояния в терминах Л.В.Щербы), ср. рус. Мне грустно, Васе стало тревожно и двухчастная структурная схема Ndat — Vinf с дат.п. одушевленного/неодушевленного
субъекта и инфинитивом — ср. рус. (а) Всем встать! (б) Вася эту кашу заварил, Васе и расхлебывать, (в) Фургону тут не развернуться, (г) Некому работать и т.п. В статье показано, что данные типы предложений несводимы друг другу и имеют разные структурные свойства.

Considering the lack of detailed contrastive studies German – Spanish in the field of the so-called „free datives“, the aim of this paper is to fill a gap in the literature regarding the „possessive dative“ (PD). In the first chapter, I introduce the concept
of PD in German and in Spanish focusing on its meaning and function and contrasting it with other major Germanic and Romance languages. In this sense, I pay special attention to the explanation of the inalienable relationship between the PD and
the relational noun (1.3.). The second chapter provides a contrastive overview of semantic-syntactic studies on the actantial or not-actantial status of PD in German and Spanish. In the third and last chapter, I carry out a contrastive analysis of semantics of verbs that usually combine with PD. For this purpose I focuse on one type of correlative constructions of the PD, existing in both German and Spanish, which are characterized by having an accusative [+hum] and a locative prepositional phrase. The comparative study shows that the PD behaves similarly from the
syntactic, semantic and combinatory point of view in both German and Spanish.

Dative experiencer predicates in Hungarian investigates the argument structure and the syntax of appeal to- and important-type predicates in Hungarian. Couched in terms of Reinhart’s (2000, 2002) Theta System, the thesis presents arguments for the need to resort to the lexicon in setting up systematic generalizations concerning the licensing and the basic syntactic behavior of dative experiencers. 
Dative experiencer predicates are distinct both conceptually and thematically from subject- and object-experiencers, and the three classes of predicates cannot be collapsed at any level of representation. Dative experiencers themselves can be of three distinct grammatical types. Appeal to-type predicates have dative experiencer arguments, but important-type predicates license dative thematic adjuncts, which are optional and which have distinctive semantic, morphological, and syntactic properties. A general account of thematic adjuncts is developed. Non-thematic datives are distinguished as a third type of dative experiencers. These can freely be inserted into any clause as regular adjuncts.
A fresh look is taken from this perspective at the syntax of dative experiencer constructions in Hungarian. Hungarian dative experiencer predicates are shown to be non-quirky. Their peculiar syntactic behavior is the consequence of their special thematic properties. In addition, the argument - thematic adjunct distinction helps the author to reconsider the role dative phrases play in agreement-marked infinitival constructions in Hungarian.
This thesis is of relevance to scholars working on experiencer predicates, dative case, and quirky subjects in particular; and to scholars interested in argument structure, lexicalist theories, and the argument - adjunct distinction in general.

I try to show that some datives in Russian constructions with predicatives are similar to those used with corresponding adjectives (мальчику нужно, cf. нужный мальчику), others seem to be are derived / demoted (мальчику весело, cf. веселый мальчик) and still others are specific to predicatives (мальчику холодно, cf. *холодный мальчику, #холодный мальчик). I argue for a constructional "target-oriented" generalization.

Old Icelandic is a language with rich morphology and is usually considered as having archaic syntax. Meanwhile, many morphosyntactic features of Old Icelandic including the stability of the four-case system and the productivity of dative case marking on the grammatical subject and grammatical object is arguably a result of innovation. Basing on the productivity of Dative - Predicative Structures with a copular element and a non-agreeing predicate, the author predicts that Old Icelandic is developing a class of nominal predicatives corresponding in their morphosyntax to Slavic Category of State forms

The paper discusses Russian sentence patterns without overt nominative subject and analyses them in a constraint-base generative framework with syntactic zero categories and oblique subjects, i.e. oblique NPs/DPs taking the subject position. These patterns are subclassified into patterns with 'Strong' non-nominative subjects, incl. patterns with the so called Mel'cuque's zeros (улицу засыпало песком, в своем доме на гадят) and Dative-Infitinite Structures (грузовикам здесь не проехать, им еще учиться и учиться, Всем встать!) and 'Weak' non-nominative structures, incl. patterns with Dative-Predicative Structures (ей было стыдно, ему стало холодно). A prominent feature of Dative-Predicatives Structures is that the predicates capable of taking oblique Dative NPs specified as [+animate], can also take clausal subjects (Интересно, что P), and the semiexpletive stressless pronoun это (Это было интересно) but cannot take three types of weak subject simulaneously.

In this paper we propose a syntactic analysis of dative DPs in ditransitive constructions in Russian, answering three questions: (I) what semantic roles the indirect object realizes; (II) how it is syntactically ordered with respect to the direct object realizing the theme argument, and (III) how the first two issues are related to the morphological encoding of the indirect object, as a PP or as a morphologically case-marked DP. Addressing first question (II) we show that two kinds of syntactic hierarchies between the two internal arguments of a ditransitive configuration coexist, and that there are two sorts of datives that are hierarchically higher than the theme: those that can reconstruct and those that cannot. We then establish an interpretative correlation between these two types of dative DP, showing that the former is locational and the latter is not, providing the answer to question (I) and elucidating what underlies the morphological similarity, question (III). The interpretative and syntactic differences between scrambled and base generated high datives lead us to claim that in Russian, dative ditransitives have two distinct underlying structures that are not derivationally related. A scalar approach to event structure enables us to pinpoint the interpretative correlate of each type of dative (locational vs. non-locational) and provides a conceptual argument in favor of a non-synonymy non-derivational approach we pursue here: a path scale encoding event schema cannot be transformed into a different scale based event schema due to movement of the dative DP. Finally, the scalar approach allows us to identify the lexical correlates of a possessive interpretation of the high dative vs. a more beneficiary-like interpretation. Extent scales allow the former whereas property and path scales facilitate the other.

It is argued, in agreement with Haider (1992), that some German ditransitives have a basic order acc dat. It is claimed that it has, however, been overlooked that some of these verbs have a second variant whose unmarked order is dat acc. We show that the two basic word orders result from two different conceptual structures. In lfg’s Lexical Mapping Theory, this has the consequence that the two variants subcategorise for differing grammatical functions (gfs), requiring two distinct lexical entries. The ‘high’ datives bear the grammatical function (gf) of secondary object whereas the (rarer) ‘low’ datives bear that of oblique. An outcome of the analysis is a streamlined statement of unmarked
middlefield order in German whereby argument ordering follows the gf hierarchy. The analysis sheds new light on the distribution of the so-called kriegen-passive. Although it is often held that the dative of verbs with an acc dat basic order cannot surface as nominative in the kriegen-passive, there are counterexamples. We offer a more fine-grained ‘argument composition’ analysis
of the kriegen-passive from which it emerges straightforwardly that it is only in the variant with acc dat as basic order that kriegen-passive is ruled out. The variant with dat acc basic order permits kriegen-passive, and it is this (overlooked) variant that occurs in the above mentioned counterexamples. In sum, some of the verbs thought to license only ‘low’ datives are shown to select
either type of dative. This alternation is, however, a reflection of differences in conceptual structure. The distribution of kriegen-passive with these ditransitives patterns with the conceptual structures.

This article critically scrutinizes the perceived view that the emergence of non-core dative constructions in Modern Hebrew is due to a Slavic-Yiddish influence. It studies the Biblical and Mishnaic sources, showing that these language strata contain highly similar constructions to the ones in Modern Hebrew. It additionally shows that parallel constructions existed in languages spoken in the Jewish communities at the time of
the revival, revealing that this linguistic phenomenon is typologically widely attested.
We therefore claim that this could be an example of an internalization of the old grammar in the new spoken language, enhanced by the fact that similar constructions are reflected in the non-Hebrew native languages of the revival era speakers. These speakers, at the same time, imported into their colloquial Hebrew a sub-type of non-core dative—the discursive dative—to which they could not have been exposed through the ancient written texts, since this type of dative construction occurs only in the spoken language.

In this paper we describe the pragmatic, lexical and syntactic properties of the Syrian Arabic Coreferential Dative Construction (CDC), featuring a dative element bearing agreement features which are identical to those of the subject in the clause, the Coreferential Dative (CD), and an obligatory expression of attenuative vague measure, described by us in Al-Zahre & Boneh (2010). We first show that the CD, which has no truth conditional meaning, contributes to the creation of a Conventional Implicature (Horn 2004, Potts 2005). Second, we propose a way to compositionally integrate the CD into the derivation of these constructions by arguing that the visible pronominal features are non-referential but rather the morphological reflex of checked uninterpretable phi-features on a defective applicative head. To couch the analysis in a wider context, we show how it can extend to other categories of non-core dative in Syrian Arabic.
In this paper we describe the pragmatic, lexical and syntactic properties of the Syrian Arabic Coreferential Dative Construction (CDC), featuring a dative element bearing agreement features which are identical to those of the subject in the clause, the Coreferential Dative (CD), and an obligatory expression of attenuative vague measure, described by us in Al-Zahre & Boneh (2010). We first show that the CD, which has no truth conditional meaning, contributes to the creation of a Conventional Implicature (Horn 2004, Potts 2005). Second, we propose a way to compositionally integrate the CD into the derivation of these constructions by arguing that the visible pronominal features are non-referential but rather the morphological reflex of checked uninterpretable phi-features on a defective applicative head. To couch the analysis in a wider context, we show how it can extend to other categories of non-core dative in Syrian Arabic.

The paper discusses syntactic properties and distribution of non-nominative subjects in Russian. I distinguish two types of Dative subjects: one of them interferes with clausal subjects and expletive pronouns and may be referred to as "weak", the second one does not interfere with any other type of subjects and may be referred to as "strong". Modern Russian has a wide variety of grammatical subjects. Apart from overt nominative subjects which trigger agreement, it has clausal subjects (both CPs and VP-infinitives), oblique subjects (Specs of non-agreeing TPs), semi-expletive pronoun это 'it', 'this one' and, finally, case-marked zero subjects in 3Sg. and 3Pl., cf. (Melčuk 1979). Russian zero subjects are pronouns, which select for nominative case and (+ Sg.) or (+ Pl.) agreement feature. The two zero pronouns have different role and reference properties and are bound to two different sentence patterns: ∅ people ((Vf.3.Pl); + intentional action) ∅ elements ((Vf.3.Sg); - intentional action)

This paper aims at investigating a special, causative use of dative case in Hungarian that has not received much attention in the literature so far. I show that Hungarian dative causers differ from dative causers in the languages of the Balkan Sprachbund, German, or Spanish in important ways. What makes Hungarian dative causers different is that they are not licensed and interpreted via syntactic structure but are lexically determined to be causative given that dative case has a special, causative lexical entry in Hungarian.