Seminar support sheet seminar 3 (Concepte): Subcategorization Frames

A. Why do we need subcategorization?

So far
PSRs = stated in terms of grammatical & lexical categories; grammatical categories are re-written as lexical categories; lexical categories
are re-written as lexical items (i.e., words), e.g.: NP Det ` A ` N; Det an; A interesting; N book
context-free lexical insertion rules only categorial info was relevant for the functioning of grammar
except for their categorial information/feature (i.e., run [+V]; boy [+N]), lexical items were treated as atomic entities
this was untenable bc. lexical items belonging to the same lexical category have different combinatorial abilities there should be
contextual restrictions on the insertion of lexical items; even when they belong to the same category, lexical items are not
interchangeable.
e.g. The boy read a book/ *The boy relied the book/ The John read a book./ *The book read a boy.
- lexical items should be inserted only in the appropriate contexts in a S
- a descriptively adequate grammar needs some mechanism which takes into account the
contextual restrictions on the insertion of lexical items
Proposal: the function of PSRs is two-fold:
a) context-free categorial rules = show the constituency of phrases (NP Det ` N)
b) context-sensitive rules which look at individual lexical items, converting them into sets of syntactic & semantic features >>
subcategorization rules (bc. they partition categories into subsets) (N )
previously atomic symbols, lexical items are now seen as structured entities/complex symbols (CS) composed of more elementary units
called features (N CS/ ..)
B. Subcategorization rules divided into
a) strict subcategorization rules (&features) and b) selectional rules (& features)

analyze a lexical category

analyze a lexical category in
in terms of its distributional contexts (the
terms of its inherent or contextual
frames it can be inserted in)
semantic features
(syntactic)
a)1) Strict subcategorization rules indicate the local context in which a particular subcategory can function.

the sequence of sister grammatical categories that the analyzed lexical category occurs with
e.g.: the lexical category V is contained in MV (MV .. V ..) >> the verbs frames of subcategorization are given wrt its sister
categories inside the MV (the nr and types of objects that the V takes)

Transitive vs. intransitive Vs (Vs which appear in the immediate context of an NP vs. those which need no (non-prepositional)
object to yield well-formed Ss)
Transitive
Intranstitive
V CS/ ---NP
V CS/ ---
V:{love, close, open, fix, repair, cut, etc.}
V: {bark, chirp, run, elapse, bark, etc.}
He cannot cut the bread.
They love syntax.
V CS/---NP ` PP
V: {charge sb. with sth; inforn sb. of sth, absolve sb from sth,
rob/deprive sb of sth}
V CS/ ---NP ` {AdvP/PP} (+ Manner/ Time/ Place)
He treated her well/with due care/with respect
He put it on the desk/on the table.

Another month has elapsed.

Dogs bark.
V CS/---PP
V:{Brag about sth; complain sbout sth, look for sb., rely on sb.,
etc.}
V CS/ --- {AdvP/PP} (+ Manner/ Time/ Place)
He behaved well
It lasted long/ for a whole day.
He was lying in bed/there
V CS/ ---PP ` PP
They argued with us about it.
I agree with you on this

V CS/ ---NP ` AP (resultative)

He kicked the door open.
They painted the town red.
V CS/ --- S (some transitive Vs also take clausal
complements)
I believe your story. / I believe that you are telling the truth.
I know the truth. / I know that he is honest.
V CS/ --- NP ` S
They informed us that we were late.
They persuaded me that it was best to leave

(Intransitive verbs do not take complements, either NPs or clausal

ones)

V CS/ ----PP ` S
They argued with us that they were innocent.
They agreed with us that we were right.

a) 2) Strict subcategorization features

- each rule defines a feature which characterizes some verb category; features indicate the minimal frame in which some lexical item is
allowed to be inserted; they are part of the lexicon (parts of a words lexical entry)
e.g.: when we de-compose a lexical item (a word), first we provide the categorial feature (what category/class the word belongs to); then, the
subcategorization feature (i.e., the minimal frame of distribution of the word):
eat
rely
chirp
inform
read
depend
bark
charge
[+ V ]
[+ V]
[+ V]
[+ V]
categorial info
[ + --NP]
[+ --PP]
[+ --]
[+ --NP ` PP]
subcategorial info

Characteristics of subcategorization rules + features:

1) take into account DS contexts (which may then be modified by Ts) e.g.: transitive verbs may have their d.o. deleted :
(1)
He was writing a letter >> He was writing
[What was he writing?] (write remains trans. at SS)
(2)
He is still breathing >> He is still breating [* What was he breating?] (breathe is intrans. )
2) are local: take into account the first phrase that contains the analyzed item + only look at the obligatory elements required by that item,
not at optional ones (
(3)
He relied on her [in the past]. / He relied on her./ *He relied. /*He relied in the past.
(4)
He saw her [yesterday]. / He saw her. / *He saw.
3) are finite: can only be stated fc. of the given context, they are relations in praesentia.
4) are not predictable from merely the meaning of an item/word: near synonyms have different subcat. frames: e.g. wait ( ---PP) vs. await
(--NP) >> knowledge of an items subcategorial frame = essential aspect of ones knowing the word & the language
5) apply to all parts of speech
b) Selectional rules & features
- selectional rules introduce semantic features in the description; some semantic features are inherent (characterize the meaning of a given
item without reference to context) (e.g., water [+liquid]; teacher [+person/human], etc.); others are contextual (impose limitations on the
semantic context of insertion of an item > selectional restrictions)
- selectional rules apply after strict subcategorization rules; they further refine the partition of Vs, Adjs, Ns, etc. by progressively introducing
inherent & contextual semantic features
- !! the verb imposes semantic constraints on both its Su & objects
eat CS/ [+Animate]NP ---[+ edible]NP
assert CS/ [+Animate, + Person]NP ---- [Proposition]S
Obs: when two lexical categories combine (e.g., V and its NP object), one of them is selectionally dominant >> the V impses selectional
restrictions on the type of NP that can function as its object >> given a V NP sequence and some verb which is [ ---NP], selectional features
determine a paradigmatic set of nouns that may be objects of that V.
C. Unergative, Unaccusative and Transitive Vs
Transitives: NP1 V NP2 (two obligatory arguments)
Unaccusatives: (one obligatory argument) DS: - V NP; SS: NP V; their Su = a former object >> similar movement as in
passives, only there is no switch btw. Su & d.o, since they only have one argument >> select the be auxiliary > similarity to
passives
Unergatives: (one obligatory argument) DS: NP ` V; SS: NP ` V; their Su = a true subject (a subject in both DS & SS >> no
movement); select the have auxiliary, like transitive Vs
unaccusatives share with transitives the subcategorization feature [ --- NP] and with passives auxiliary selection (the aux.
be), which is structurally-motivated since both have as subjects a derived object.
- besides auxiliary selection (and past participles used as adjectives), there are other means to identify unaccusatives:
in Italian: the use of the pronominal NE (= of them/these) it appears pre-verbally, with a quantifier post-verbally:
(5)
Maria ne invitera due. = Mary will invite two of them
- NE can only appear with post-verbal (quantified) NPs which are D.O.s (NOT I.Os or pre-verbal Subjects)
(6)
Giovanni ne invitera molti. / *Giovanni ne parlera a due. /* Molti ne arriveranno. BUT
- NE can also appear with passive constructions, i.e., with post-verbal (passive) subjects:
(7)
a. Ne saranno invitati molti. (Many of them will be invited)/ * Molti ne saranno invitati.
Why? > bc. the passive Su is an underlying d.o. (the condition of its occurrence is met)
What is the relevance of this for our discussion? > Since - NE allows derived post-verbal Su (in passives)
- passives are similar to unaccusatives

NE is (only) allowed with unaccusatives, since NE refers to a postverbal NP which was an initial d.o. >> the appearance of NE with an
intransitive V shows that that V is an unaccusative:
(8)
Ne arrivano molti (Many of them arrive) / * Ne telefonano molti (Many of them telephoned)
D. Vs used transitively (NP V NP) & intransitively (NP V) (in SS)
(9)

a. The artillery sank two enemy ships (Su V d.o.)

b. Two enemy ships sank
(Su V; the Su = the former d.o.)
-

(10)
(11)

the V the same meaning in both instances + the semantic relation btw. the V & its d.o is the same, even if in a) the element is a
d.o. and in b) it appears as a Su;
the intransitive V in (9b) behaves like an unaccusative >> selects be in the perfect, allows NE (in the relevant lgs.) (cf. (10))
its transitive counterpart in (9a), which selects have as aux. and disallows NE (cf. (11))
Due navi nemiche sono affondati./ Ne affondarono due (Two of them sank)
Lartigleria ha affondate due navi nemiche.

Vs which exhibit this trans-intrans alternation have both a transitive (NP1 V NP2) and an unaccusative use (- V NP >> NP V)
E. CONCLUSIONS
transitives & unaccusatives are alike in that they share the feature [ -- NP]; i.e., both have underlying objects
transitives & unergatives are alike in that they share the feature [ NP V], i.e., both have underlying subjects
!! while transitives have both an underlying Su and an underlying d.o. (have two obligatory arguments, the Su

& the d.o), unaccusatives & unergatives have only one obligatory argument, which appears as the Su in SS,
but is generated in different positions in DS: as a d.o. for unaccusatives, as a Su for unergatives

since passivization is a rule whereby the underlying subject is demoted (replaced by the d.o. and sent to the
right to be hosted by an adjunct by-phrase), only verbs that have an underlying Su (i.e., a Su in DS) can
undergo passivization >> unaccusatives cannot undergo passivization

F. Subcategorizing English Prepositions & Adjectives

I. Subcategorizing English Prepositions
Jackendoff (1973): particles should be analyzed as a subcategory of prepositions (rather than a
distinct part of speech) >> particles & prepositions belong to the same lexical category, P (which can
also include some time and place adverbs like here, there, now, etc.)
these have the following similarities:
1) they subcategorize the same Vs:
(1) Put the books down/on the desk/there. / She ws lying down/on the bed/here.
2) may be modified by the adverb right
(2) He kept drinking right until midnight / The boy came right from the store. (right + PP)
(3) I put it right down. / Come right in! (right + Prt.)
(4) Stay right here. Come here, right now! (right + place/time advs)
3) occur in similar specific syntactic constructions (Ss with inversion & elliptic inverted exclamations):
(5) Into the house he ran. / Out he walked. // Off with her head! Down with injustice! Into the dungeon with
the traitors!
4) many particles & prepositions are homonymous (across, about, around, down, up, in, out, through)
particles are a subclass of prepositions, i.e., they are intransitive prepositions >> the lexical category
Preposition (P) is subcategorized for transitivity into:
A) always intransitive prepositions class of formatives that can only function as particles (away,
aside, forth, etc.)>> cannot take an object NP >> P [= Prt] CS/ ---
(6) jump aside, come forth, go away, lay sth. aside, put a proposal forth
(7) He jumped aside. / She went away. / He laid the issue aside. / * He laid the issue aside the discussion. /
He put a proposal forth. / * He put a proposal forth the committee.
!! Problem of transitive Vs which take particles (= intransitive prepositions); These particles, being
intransitive, cannot be followed by an object NP; !! the NP that does appear = the d.o of the verb.
(8) He jumped aside. (jump= intrans V)/ He came forth. (come = intrans. V) but
(9) He laid the issue aside./ He laid aside the issue.//He put a proposal forth./He put forth a proposal. (trans
Vs)
What happens: Particle Movement/Preposition Reanalysis
V NP [P]Prt
Vi + Pi NP
- the complex V (V + Prt) first appears as a discontinuous constituent (with the Vs d.o. in between); then,
the particle moves next to the verb and the two form one syntactic constituent. (see the subscripts)
Obs: when the d.o. is nominal (an NP), both configurations are accepted: put a proposal forth > put forth a
proposal; when the d.o. is pronominal, particle movement is disallowed: put it forth > * put forth it
B) always transitive prepositions class of formatives that must be followed by an NP (>> the NP can
never appear btw the V and the prep) (used only as prepositions) >> P CS/ -- NP
(10) look at ., wait for .., do with .., enquire about .., etc.
C) prepositions that have both transtitive and intransitive uses >> class of formatives which are both
prepositions and particles >> P CS/ -- (NP)
(11) walk across (a room/ a field); stand by (your friend); hang around (a place); come down (ones horse)
D) sometimes, prepositions subcategorize for another PP (a prep may govern a PP) >> P CS/ --PP
(12) because [of you]; wait until [after the war]; be from [near Bucharest]; jump from [behind the bushes]
E) P CS/ --NP ` PP: a large number of productive idiomatic PPs: from [time] [to time]; from [head][to
foot], etc.

Obs!: in English, only Vs and Prepositions can relate directly to Ns; (other) Ns and adjectives relate to NPs
indirectly, by means of prepositions: with him/ admire him // fond of music/ an interest in music/ * fond
music/ * interest music
II. Subcategorizing English Adjectives
A. Adjectives that occur only after link verbs (predicatively) or post-nominally (after Ns) in nominal
phrases (NOT pre-nominally, the usual place of Engl. adjs) = PREDICATIVE adjectives
(13)
I am interested in this proposal. / a man interested in art. / * an interested man
B. Adjectives that appear pre-nominally (Adj ` N) > accept the subcategorial context [ - N]; Most
adjectives appear in this position = ATTRIBUTIVE adjectives
(14)
beautiful girl/ cute dog/ ..
OBS:
1) Most adjectives occur both - pre-nominally: uncertain weather/ interesting book)
- predicatively (after copula Vs):The weather is uncertain. /The book is
interesting.
2) Some adjectives can only be attributive: ([+ N]):
a) restrictive/intensifying adjs: utter, sheer, utmost, mere, only, pure, alleged, chief.
(15)
an utter confusion/ sheer nonsense/ the alleged thief // * The confusion is utter./ * The thief seems
alleged. / * This nonsense is sheer. / * The trouble is only
b) temporal & modal adjs: future, former, late, occasional, present, current, sure, born
(16)
the former PM; the future president, a born loser/ * The loser is born. / * The lover is occasional./ *The
king is former.
c) adjs related to manner adverbs (which mostly occur with deverbal Ns): heavy, early, new
(17)
a heavy smoker/drinker; an early riser/ a new comer // * The comer is new. / * This smoker is heavy.
d) noun-based adjs: chemical engineer/ rural policeman
3) Predicative adjs accept (at least) the subcategorial context [VCop --]MV
(18)
He is sad/ She went mad / He looks interested.
- some adjs can only be used predicatively (and possibly post-nominally) those that describe a state &
derived with the affix a: ablaze, ajar, asleep, awash, astir, etc.
(19)
The door is ajar./ He is asleep. / The desk was awash. // * an awash desk. / * an ajar door/ *an asleep
boy.
4) Adjectives & their object-taking possibilities (>> transitive and intransitive adjectives)
! Adj do not govern NPs, only PPs >> when we talk about transitive Adj, we refer to those that select PPs
(i.e., a prepositional object)
a) Intransitive adjectives take no objects; subcategorize for a null context > A CS/ -- (red, small, tall)
b) Transitive adjectives may or must be followed by a PP >> A CS/ --PP
(20)
He is fond of his wife. / *He is fond. // He is satisfied with his lot. / He is satisfied.
c) ! Unacusative Adjs the adj occurs in two structures; the same argument is realized either as a PP (with the
default prep of) or as a Su. (certain, sure)
(21)
Bill certain of success. > Success was certain [ - ] // He is sure of a bad result. > A bad result is sure.
d) (transitive) adjs that subcategorize for complement clauses >> A CS/ -- S (confident, thankful,
grateful, eager, happy, etc.)
(22)
I was confident [that I would win]. / You should be thankful [that you didnt get fired].