We would like to thank the audiences at the 2004 Konstanz Complex Predicate Workshop and at the 2005 WECOL meeting at the University of Southern California, and two anonymous reviewers, for valuable feedback and discussion. All errors remain our responsibility. This work was partially supported by an International Joint Activities Small Grant from the British Academy.
On the licensing of causatives of directed motion: Waltzing Matilda all over†
Article first published online: 28 JUN 2006
Volume 60, Issue 2, pages 121–155, August 2006
How to Cite
Folli, R. and Harley, H. (2006), On the licensing of causatives of directed motion: Waltzing Matilda all over. Studia Linguistica, 60: 121–155. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9582.2006.00135.x
- Issue published online: 28 JUN 2006
- Article first published online: 28 JUN 2006
- Received June 15, 2004 Accepted Mar 6, 2006
Abstract. This paper focuses on one famous example of an alternation that has been supposed to depend on telicity, the causative manner-of-motion alternation in English John ran the dog *(to the park). One standard approach has taken telicity to be central to the possibility of causative formation. We argue here that although telicity can be a property of these constructions, it is not necessary for the formation of a motion causative in English. Rather, what licenses the alternation is the availability of a specific syntactic structure, containing a small clause, interacting with non-telicity-related semantic restrictions imposed by verb meanings.