Instrument subjects are agents or causers

In order to capture this generality, Van Valin & Wilkins (1996) and Ramchand (2003) among others have proposed that the thematic role of the external argument position is in fact underspecified. The relevant notion is that of an effector (in Van Valin & Wilkins) or of an abstract causer/initiator (in Ramchand). In this paper we argue against a total underspecification of the external argument relation. While we agree that (1b) does not instantiate an instrument theta role in subject position, we argue that a complete underspecification of the external theta-position is not feasible, but that two types of external theta roles have to be distinguished, Agents and Causers. 1 Our arguments are based on languages where Agents and Causers show morpho-syntactic independence (section 2.1) and the behavior of instrument subjects in English, Dutch, German and Greek (section 2.2 and 3). We show that instrument subjects are either Agent or Causer like. In section (4) we give an analysis how arguments realizing these thematic notions are introduced into syntax.

[1]  Scott DeLancey,et al.  Event Construal and Case Role Assignment , 1991 .

[2]  Scott Delancey,et al.  Notes on Agentivity and Causation , 1984 .

[3]  Christopher Piñón,et al.  A Finer Look at the Causative-Inchoative Alternation , 2001 .

[4]  Dalina Kallulli.  Unaccusatives with dative causers and experiencers: A unified account , 2006 .

[5]  HANS KAMP,et al.  REMARKS ON LEXICAL STRUCTURE AND DRS CONSTRUCTION , 1994 .

[6]  Mara Frascarelli,et al.  PHASES OF INTERPRETATION , 2006 .

[7]  B. Levin.  Unaccusativity: At the Syntax-Lexical Semantics Interface , 1994 .

[8]  Jan van Voorst,et al.  Some Systematic Differences Between the Dutch, French, and English Transitive Construction. , 1996 .

[9]  R. Oehrle,et al.  Books Awaiting Review , 1984, CL.

[10]  L. Talmy.  Semantic Causative Types , 1976 .

[11]  Andrew Carnie,et al.  The Syntax of Verb Initial Languages , 2000 .

[12]  Jeffrey Gruber.  Studies in lexical relations , 1965 .

[13]  Edit Doron,et al.  Agency and Voice: The Semantics of the Semitic Templates , 2003 .

[14]  Tanya Reinhart,et al.  The Theta System – an overview , 2003 .

[15]  Beth Levin,et al.  English Verb Classes and Alternations: A Preliminary Investigation , 1993 .

[16]  Charles J. Fillmore,et al.  THE CASE FOR CASE. , 1967 .

[17]  Johan Rooryck,et al.  Phrase structure and the lexicon , 1996 .

[18]  Robert D. van Valin,et al.  The case for “effector”: Case roles, agents, and agency revisited , 1996 .

[19]  Charles N. Li,et al.  Subject and topic , 1979 .

[20]  Emmon W. Bach,et al.  Universals in Linguistic Theory , 1970 .

[21]  D. Cruse.  Some thoughts on agentivity , 1973, Journal of Linguistics.

[22]  Glynn Winskel,et al.  Event Structures , 1986, Advances in Petri Nets.

[23]  D. Nilsen,et al.  The instrumental case in English : syntactic and semantic considerations , 1973 .

[24]  Florian Schäfer,et al.  The properties of anticausatives crosslinguistically , 2006 .

[25]  I. M. Schlesinger,et al.  Instruments as agents: on the nature of semantic relations , 1989, Journal of Linguistics.

[26]  A. Kratzer.  Severing the External Argument from its Verb , 1996 .