Passivisability of English periphrastic causatives.

Causatives in English and other languages display differences in passivisability. In line with e.g. Rice (1987) it is argued that this variation is due to different degrees of semantic transitivity. Transitivity is defined in terms of Hopper and Thompson’s (1980) parameters, modified in the light of typological research on causatives. The British National Corpus was used to obtain examples of both active and passive periphrastic causative make, semantically the most general causative. A comparison between these two data sets yields quantitative evidence for a number of correlations between transitivity properties and passivisability. Because of the generality of make the results may be extended to other causatives. And due to the grounding in typological work the correlations can be stated as implicational universals. These universals explain many of the facts of differential passivisability but some additional hypotheses are made to account for more. A few questions remain, but these may evaporate if we allow for the possibility that some semantic factors are more important than others.

[1]  Sally Rice Towards a cognitive model of transitivity , 1987 .

[2]  B. Levin,et al.  Scalar Structure Underlies Telicity in "Degree Achievements" , 1999 .

[3]  Kazuko Inoue,et al.  CAUSE AND MAKE IN SEMANTIC REPRESENTATION , 1992 .

[4]  Masayoshi Shibatani,et al.  Three Reasons for Not Deriving ‘Kill’ from ‘Cause to Die’ in Japanese , 1972 .

[5]  A. Verhagen,et al.  Interaction and causation : Causative constructions in modern standard Dutch , 1997 .

[6]  L. Talmy Lexicalisation patterns: semantic structure in lexical forms , 1985 .

[7]  Talmy Givón,et al.  The Binding Hierarchy and the Typology of Complements , 1980 .

[8]  David R. Dowty Thematic proto-roles and argument selection , 1991 .

[9]  Edward L. Keenan,et al.  Language Typology and Syntactic Description: Passive in the world's languages , 2007 .

[10]  Ray Jackendoff,et al.  Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar , 1972 .

[11]  Thomas F. Shannon Aspects of complementation and control in modern German : the syntax and semantics of permissive verbs , 1989 .

[12]  Jerrold J. Katz Propositional Structure and Illocutionary Force: A Study of the Contribution of Sentence Meaning to Speech Acts , 1983 .

[13]  Charles J. Fillmore,et al.  Subjects, speakers, and roles , 1970, Synthese.

[14]  Guy Aston,et al.  The BNC Handbook: Exploring the British National Corpus with SARA , 1998 .

[15]  Naomi S. Baron Language acquisition and historical change , 1977 .

[16]  R. Dixon,et al.  Changing valency Case studies in transitivity: A typology of causatives: form, syntax and meaning , 2000 .

[17]  Leonard Talmy,et al.  Force Dynamics in Language and Cognition , 1987, Cogn. Sci..

[18]  Gaëtanelle Gilquin Corpus-based cognitive study of the main English causative verbs : a syntactic, semantic, lexical and stylistic approach , 2004 .

[19]  Willem B. Hollmann The iconicity of infinitival complementation in Present-day English causatives , 2005 .