THE INTRANSITIVE PREDICATION

(ONE-ARGUMENT VERBS)

Traditionally, one-argument verbs minimally contain one NP, which generally appears in the subject
position, but the main problem seems to be related to the position of that argument in the argument frame
of the verb, so the problem is whether it is the external or the internal argument. The position of the
argument has important consequences for the syntactic behaviour of the verb.
One-argument verbs fall into two categories: a) unergatives and b) unaccusatives.
Eg. A) He may protest.
He overdosed.
He complained.
The children are swimming.
They were coughing because of the smoke.
B) There arose an unfortunate misunderstanding.
There came a cry of anguish from inside the house.
There appeared a ghostly face at the window.
In front of the house there stands a statue of the general.
There have arisen several problems.

A) Unergatives
Describe mainly volitional acts
The subject has control over the action, it is the initiator of the event, it is an Agent
The NP appearing with an unergative verb is its external argument
Is is not possible to have a postverbal imperative subject with unergatives
Eg. *Eat you up!
The past participles of unergative verbs cannot be used as adjectives in a post-head position
Eg. *The man talked to was a neighbour of mine.
The past participles of unergatives cannot be used as an adjective in a pre-head position
Eg, * The yawned student eventually fell asleep in class.
Unergatives evince the feature of atelicity, in other words they do not presuppose an end point
Eg. The boys cried with laughter.
Unergatives allow a so-called cognate object, an object which copies the semantic features of the
verb and which occupies the canonical position of the direct object, namely after the governing
verb.
Eg. They slept the sleep of the just.
They died a heroic death.
She dreamt a nice dream.

B) Unaccusatives
The subject of unaccusatives undergoes a change of location or state and has no control over the
action
The subject is not an Agent, it is generally assigned the theta-role Patient or Theme
The unique argument of an unaccusative verb is the internal argument
In Belfast English it is possible to have a postverbal imperative subject
Eg. Leave you now!
Arrive you before 6!
Be going you out of the door when he arrives!
The past participles of unaccusatives can be used as adjectives in a post-head position
Eg, The train arrived at platform 5 is the London Express.
 They arrested a businessman recently returned from Thailand.
The past participles of unaccusatives can be used as adjectives in a pre-head position
Eg. He is some kind of a fallen hero.
Unaccusatives evince the feature of telicity, namely they presuppose an end point.
Eg. The car had vanished from sight.
They do not allow a direct object
Eg. *The prices decreased cheese.

UNERGATIVE VERBS
a) predicates describing willed or volitional acts: work, play, speak, talk, smile, grin, frown,
grimace, think, mediate, cogitate, daydream, skate, ski, swim, hunt, bicycle, walk, skip, jog,
quarrel, fight, wrestle, box, agree, disagree, knock, bang, hammer, pray, weep, cry, kneel, bow,
laugh, dance, crawl.
b) verbs denoting manners of speaking: whisper, shout, mumble, grumble, growl, bellow, etc
c) predicates describing sounds made by animals: bark, neigh, quack, roar, chirp, oink, mew, etc
d) verbs denoting involuntary bodily processes: cough, sneeze, hiccough, belch, burp, defecate,
urinate, sleep, cry, weep, etc

Eg. They quarreled quite often.

We sneezed a lot with hay fever.
They ski in the Alps every year.
She was weeping with joy at the ceremony.

UNACCUSATIVE VERBS
A) burn, fall, drop, sink, float, slide, slip, glide, soar, flow, ooze, seep, trickle, drip, gush, hang,
dangle, sway, wave, tremble, shake, languish, flourish, thrive, drown, stumble, trip, roll,
succumb, dry, boil, seethe, lie (involuntarily), sit (involuntarily), bend(involuntarily),
B) inchoatives (verbs showing a process resulting in a change of state) : melt, freeze, evaporate,
redden, darken, yellow, rot, decompose, germinate, sprout, bud, wilt, wither, increase, decrease,
blush, explode, die, perish, choke, suffocate, scatter, disperse, vanish, disappear
C) verbs of existing and happening: exist, occur, happen, result, take place
D) aspectual predicates: begin, start, stop, cease, continue, end, etc
E) duratives: last, remain, stay, survive, etc
F) verbs denoting a non-voluntary emission of stimuli that has an impact on the senses: shine,
sparkle, glitter, glow, jingle, clink, clang, snap, crackle, pop, smell, stink, etc
G) verbs of existence: blaze, bubble, cling, coexist, correspond, decay, depend, drift, dwell, elapse,
emanate, exist, fester, float, flow, fly, grow, hide, hover, live, loom, lurk, overspread, persist,
predominate, prevail, project, protrude, revolve, reside, rise, shelter, settle, smoulder, spread,
stream, survive, sweep, swing, tower, wind
H) verbs of appearance: accumulate, appear, arise, awake, awaken, break, burst, dawn, derive,
develop, emerge, ensure, evolve, exude, flow, follow, gush, happen, issue, materialize, occur,
plop, spill, steal, stem, supervene, surge

Remark: the basic meaning of the verbs in the last two categories may not be that of existence or
appearance, but, when used in the there-insertion construction, they will show this sense.

Different D-structures

Unergatives : NP [VP V]

Unaccusatives: _ [VP V NP]

This D-structure is in accordance with the case-assigning properties of the two classes of verbs. Following
Burzio’s generalization, a verb which lacks an external argument, that is does not assign an external theta
role also fails to assign Accusative case. Therefore, the internal argument of unaccusatives has to move
out of the VP internal position in order to be assigned case. On the contrary, unergatives, which have an
external argument, can assign Accusative case under specific conditions.

Eg. He dreamt a nice dream.

TESTS FOR UNERGATIVITY/UNACCUSATIVITY

A. There-insertion
Only unaccusatives (with the exception of verbs of change of state) and passive verbs can occur in the
there-insertion construction, unergatives are not allowed in this construction.

Eg. A problem developed. /There developed a problem.

A ship appeared in the horizon. / There appeared a ship in the horizon.
A woman lodged at Mrs Brown’s. / *There lodged a woman at Mrs Brown’s
Oil soared in price. / *There soared in price.
Eg, (passive predicates) There was found in this cave an ancient treasure.
There was glued a poster on this wall.
Eg. (unergatives) *There sneezed a man.
*There broke out a fire.
*There spoke a man in a loud voice.
Eg. (change of state) *On the line there are drying a lot of clothes.
*There melted a lot of snow on the streets of the city.

1. The there-insertion construction which diagnoses unaccusativity

There V NP PP

Eg. There remained three men in the room.

There followed a wave of indignation in the newspapers.
Throughout the 19th century there stood an ugly statue of the last king on the palace lawn.
There dangles a magnificent chandelier from the ceiling.

This construction simply postulates the existence of some entity and it may contain no locative
information. The existential there used in this construction is just a presentative construction, which does
not necessarily locate in space. There is devoid of meaning, it is an expletive element. The internal
argument of the verb must be [-agentive], it cannot have any control over the action denoted by the verb.
Such sentences usually express ‘coming into being’. (There began a riot. / *There ended a riot). Not all
unaccusatives allow the there-insertion construction. It is mainly verbs of existence (the state resulting
from the appearance of some entity) and verbs of appearance (come into existence), which share the idea
of existence. They also require a location argument, be it overt or implicit, which means that these verbs
have two internal arguments – one describing the entity that exists (Theme) and the other one describing
the location at which the entity exists (the location argument). Such verbs lack a causative variant.

Eg. *He appeared a cat at the door.

*They remained three men in the room.
There occupies the subject position, [Spec, IP] so the internal argument of the unaccusative verb can
remain in situ, inheriting case from there, with which it forms a chain <therei, NPi>. It inverts with the
auxiliary in question formation (Were there many children in the yard?)

 There are unaccusatives derived from basically two argument-verbs causative predicates which
become transitive and do not allow the there-insertion construction. The causative component of
the predicate disallows the there-insertion construction.

Eg. The glass broke. / He broke the glass

*There broke the glass.

2. The second type of there-insertion construction

There V PP NP

This construction need not be related to unaccusatives. There is a long list of verbs that can occur in this
construction. There in this construction carries a clear locative meaning.
Eg. A little boy darted into the room. / There darted into the room a little boy.

Verbs that can occur in this construction: amble, climb, crawl, creep, dance, dart, flee, float, fly, gallop,
head, hobble, hop, hurtle, jump, leap, march, plod, prance, ride, roam, roll, run, rush, sail, shuffle, skip,
speed, stagger, stray, stride, strut, swim, trot, trudge, walk.

3.Definiteness

Definite NPs, proper names and pronouns cannot normally be used as subjects of the there-
insertion constructions.

Eg. *There is every student of mine in the room.

*There is John in the garden.
* There was him waiting for Mary.

Indefinites are allowed as subjects in there-insertion constructions, while the postverbal NP had
to denote a discourse referent that is new to the hearer.

Eg. There were flies in the room.

There remained a boy in the room.
Nevertheless, there may be other situations when not only indefinites are allowed as subjects of a there-
insertion construction:

Partitives (headed by indefinite determiners)

Eg. There remained many of the same students at both seminars.
Definite NPs - they are allowed as subjects of the there-insertion construction if and only if they
denote discourse referent that is new to the hearer.
Eg. There was the mother of a student in the office.
There was the smell of liquor on his breath.
Definite NPs which denote kinds
Eg. There were those kinds of books at the library.
There was every flavour of ice for tasting.
 There was that kind of book listed in the catalog. (The underlined NP does not necessarily
refer to a unique object, it refers to a kind of objects, so it cannot be replaced by the pronoun it as
an anaphoric expression - *However, it was checked out).
Definite NPs if the noun is modified by an AP, a PP or a clause:
Eg, There weren’t the doctors to staff the clinic.
There is her future to consider.
There has arisen the important problem of their social status.
Definite NPs in an enumeration/list
Eg. Q: What else is there in that drawer?
A: There’s the rubber, the red pencil, and the writing paper.
Q: Who can we ask?
A: There’s Ann, or Mike, or Pete.
Remark: such definite NPs are allowed only it the truth of their existential assertion is presupposed.

4. The Predicate Restriction

There-insertion is allowed only with stage-level predicates, namely predicates which refer to unique,
individual events. There-insertion is not compatible with generic interpretations.

Eg. There was a man sick. / *There was a man tall.

There are three pigs loose. / *There are three pigs stupid.

The set of sentences on the left refer to two unique, individual events – one person who was sick at some
point in time or three pigs who are loose at some point in time, whereas the set of sentences on the right
have generic interpretations, referring to the inherent qualities of the subjects (being tall or being stupid).

Conclusion
There has no meaning of its own
It is a semantically empty element, required for structural reasons – it fills the subject position
Its presence in the sentence is dependent of the presence of its associate, the postverbal NP,
which must be indefinite

B. Intransitives and Locative Inversion

It is a non-canonical construction in which the surface subject stays inside the VP and the sentence initial
position is occupied by a locative PP. It is a construction in which only unaccusatives can appear,
unergatives and transitives are ungrammatical. The most frequently used verbs are underived
unaccusatives, namely verbs of appearance and verbs of existence as well as verbs denoting position in
space. Derived unaccusatives denoting a definite change of state cannot be used in this configuration

(locative) PP V NP

Eg. 1. On our left was the Mediterranean.

2. On the table sat a nervous cat.
3. Out of nowhere appeared a mysterious figure.

Eg. *In the dining-room drank John a glass of wine.

* In the hall talked many people.
*On the top floor opened many windows.
Nevertheless, some unergatives can also be used in this configuration, namely verbs of manner of motion
and verbs of emission.

Eg. Around them chattered and sang many girls.

Up the stairs bounded the President

C. The Resultative Construction

A resultative phrase is a phrase that denotes the state achieved by the NP argument of the verb as a result
of the action denoted by the verb. Such a phrase can be predicated only of the immediately postverbal NP,
namely the internal argument of the verb. In other words, only those verbs that have an internal argument
are compatible with Resultative phrases.

Eg. The river froze [solid].

The door slid [open].
John laughed [himself sick].
The horse galloped [himself lame].

Unergatives and resultative phrases

Unergatives have no internal argument, so theoretically they should not allow resultative constructions.
Eg. *John laughed sick.
*She shouted hoarse.

In order to allow a resultative phrase, a fake reflexive object is added.

Eg, John laughed himself sick.
She shouted herself hoarse.
It is also possible to have a resultative phrase with an unergative in case the post verbal NP is not
the argument of the unergative.
Eg. The dog barked him awake.
You may sleep the baby quiet again.
Obviously, the postverbal NP is not the argument of the unergative, as the sentences below show
it. This NP is not subcategorized for by the verb.
*The dog barked him.
*You may sleep the baby.
In case the possessor and the subject of the verb are co-referential.
Eg. Mike cried [his eyes out].
Mary had better sleep [her wrinkles away].
Such sentences are incorrect if the resultative phrase is left out.
*Mike cries his eyes.
*Mary had better sleep her wrinkles.

Unaccusatives and resultative phrases

Unaccusatives have only an internal argument in their argument structure, so they cannot take
any surface object. The resultative phrase can only refer to the internal argument of the
unaccusative verb, which, at the level of the surface structure, appears in the subject position.
Only derived telic unaccusatives are the ones that allow a resultative construction
 Verbs belonging to the arrive class, which are telic, but underived (they do not have a transitive
causative counterpart) do not allow this construction (advance, arrive, ascend, come, depart,
descend, enter, escape, exit, fall, flee, go, leave, plunge, return, rise, etc)

Eg, The prisoners froze [to death]

The bottle broke [open].
The gate swung [shut].
The curtain rolled [open on the court of the queen].

Eg. *She arrived tired.

*The convict escaped exhausted.
*She fell broken to pieces.

Unaccusatives do not occur in sentences with Resultative phrases predicated of non-argumental

NPs, unlike unergatives that appear in such constructions.

Eg. *The log rolled [its bark off]. / The log rolled off.
*The cart rolled [the rubber off its wheels].
The two NPs which appear in a postverbal position are not arguments of the unaccusative verbs, they are
not subcategorized for by the verb, so they cannot enter a resultative phrase.

Unaccusatives can appear with resultative phrases without the mediation of a fake reflexive
Eg. * The water froze itself solid.

D. Intransitives and Past Participles

Generally speaking, the past participle of an unaccusative can be used as a noun modifier, both pre and
post-nominally, while the past participle of unergatives cannot.

Eg. A fallen leaf; vanished civilizations

*walked man, *slept children, *a worked man

Nevertheless, not all unaccusatives appear in a pre or post-nominal modifying position.

Eg. *A man lived in Paris, *an existed solution (atelic verbs)

The past participle of unaccusative describing atelic situations is incompatible with this position. Telic
unaccusatives are compatible with this construction.
Telic unaccusatives – verbs of appearance, verbs of disappearance, verbs of inherently directed motion,
verbs denoting an internally caused change of state.
Telic unaccusatives fall into two categories: firstly (a) verbs depicting a change of state which can be
interpreted as a property (eg. Fallen leaves, blistered feet) and which are freely used as noun modifiers,
and secondly (b) verbs depicting a change of location or of place (?a fallen child) which are less felicitous
as noun modifiers.

Phrasal intransitives

They are lexically complex verbs, made up of a verb and an Adverbial Particle. They evince a high degree
of idiomaticity. The transition from V AdvP to V Prt is made by a subgroup of verbs that combine freely
with a number of particles, mostly directional ones.
Eg. Puff across – move across sending out smoke and/or panting noisily
 Zoom across/along/away – move across, etc swiftly with engine roaring
Eg. The rain came down.

The Particles with the strongest meaning are the locative or directional ones. They preserve a high degree
of independence which is confirmed by their possible Preposing for emphasis purposes.

Eg. The balloon went up. / Up went the balloon.

Aspectual particles refer to the temporal dimension of the event. They may render a variety of meanings:
a) the incipient character of the event – out, in, off
eg. They set out to win support for their cause.
A hostile reaction has set in.
The cars set off in a cloud of dust.
b) the durative aspect – on, away (they indicate the continuation of the event)
Most verbs combine freely with on.
Eg. Speak / work / walk on

Away is more limited contextually.

Eg. He was working away.
She was laughing / muttering/ grumbling away.
c) the terminative aspect – out, away, through, off, up
Eg. This custom has died out.
He passed away quietly at midnight.
We must clean up after the party.
There’s plenty for everyone. So, eat up!

The particle up may be used to indicate intensification of the action.

Eg. The runners are warming up before the race.
Cheer up!

The contribution of the particle to the global meaning of the verb may be null, in other words a new
meaning is created as a result of the combination. The meaning of the phrasal verb no longer is a sum
total of the meanings of the two components, namely the verb and the particle, but a totally new meaning
is now associated with the resulting phrasal verb.
Eg. Come round (regain consciousness)
Do up (be fastened)
Give in (yield)
Get along (manage)
Get by (survive)
Turn up (appear)

The Syntactic behaviour

a) insertion of adverbial modifiers such as right and straight with contexts where the particle has a
locative or directional meaning.
Eg. The prices came right down when people started buying elsewhere.
b) optionality of the particle where the particle reinforces the basic meaning of the verb
Eg, climb (up); fly (up); go (away)
c) nominalizations – the Verb Particle complex turn into a noun
Eg. Break-in; make-up; sit-in; take-off; flypast; splashdown
These nominalizations occur in two possible sentence patterns:
1) with a general activity verb (do, stage, make, take, have) followed by the nominalized form functioning
as direct object
Eg. The actor is doing his make-up for the part of Othello.
A gang of thieves did a break-in last night.
The runners are having a quick warm-up before the race.
Building workers staged a walk-out.
2) an existential BE sentence, where the nominalized form appears in a postverbal position, while the
position of the subject is filled by the expletive THERE.
Eg. There was a break-in last night.
There was a walk-out during the morning.

d) preposing – stylistic device which applies for emphatic purposes. It applies where the particle does not
form a unit with the verb. It means that the subject remains in post verbal position, while the particle
moves before the verb. If the subject is an NP it can sometimes move in [Spec, vp]. If the subject is a
pronoun, it always moves in [Spec, vp].
Eg. Down came the prices.
Off came the actor’s fake beard.
Down the snow came.
In the sun went.
Down they came.
Down the snow came.

Inherent reflexives
There are a number of verbs which are inherently reflexives. The reflexive is specified as an inherent
feature by the Lexicon. Some of these verbs can subcategorize for a prepositional object.

Eg. Absent oneself; bestir oneself; perjure oneself

Avail oneself of something; pride oneself on something

Complex intransitives

Complex intransitives are two-argument verbs, which have an external argument and an internal argument
which is not a direct object, but it generally is a prepositional object or and adverbial modifier.

1.Prepositional intransitives

Prepositional intransitives are not a homogeneous class, due to various factors such as:
a) the meaning contribution of the preposition
b) some are not passivizable, as different from the greatest number of prepositional intransitives
c) the degree of idiomaticity

Examples:
1. A gang of thieves broke into her house last night.
He glanced through the article quickly.
In the examples above, the preposition retains part of its meaning.

2. Adverbs of time or manner (carefully, easily, frequently) can be inserted between the verb and the
prepositional phrase.
We will go very carefully into these proposals.
If the combination is idiomatic, it is no longer possible.
She gets at her husband frequently. / *She gets frequently at her husband.
3. Passivization – it is possible for some, but impossible for some others.
The main points were run through briefly.
If the prepositional object is part of an idiomatic phrase, passivization is blocked.
He has fallen into disrepute recently. / *Disrepute had been fallen into recently.
Passivization of the prepositional object is possible for unergatives, and unacceptable for
unaccusatives.

Intransitives with Particle and Preposition

This class includes verbs that subcategorize for a fixed particle and a fixed preposition followed by its
object.

Eg. They had done away with that piece of legislation.

The family came up against fresh problems.
Look forward to; put up with, scrape along on (a low salary)
Some collocations allow deletion of the prepositional object:
Eg. The boat went aground (on the shore)

In between the particle and the preposition an adverb of manner may be inserted:
Eg. They had done away reluctantly with that piece of legislation.

If the preposition is not deletable, passivization can apply:

Eg. Those interruptions were not put up with cheerfully.

Intransitives with a Prepositional Indirect Object

Eventive verbs, experiencer verbs and relational verbs subcategorize for an indirect object headed by the
preposition to.
Eventive – happen, befall – the Dative NP expresses the experiencer or victim of the event
Eg. What’s happened to the old man?
A great misfortune has befallen the old man (the deletion of the preposition to is
obligatory)
Experiencer – seem, appear, occur, sound, taste
Eg. How does it seem to you?
It has never occurred to her to ask herself that question.
The cake tastes funny to me.
Relational
a) general relational verbs indicating possession – belong, possess
Eg. It belongs to me.
b) relations of inferiority – bow to smb, cringe to/before smb, defer to smd/smth, submit to smd,
yield to smth
Eg. The girl bowed to the audience.
I shall always defer to my taste / to his experience.

As the prepositional object is generally an experiencer, it is not possible to passivize any of the verbs in
these categories.

Intransitives with two Prepositional Objects

a) V to about/upon/for
 Eg. He lectures to undergraduates on the Elizabethan theatre.
You should apologize to Mary for your behavior.

Most of them allow passivization, and even have two passive counterparts.
Eg. We will have to speak to the tutor about the matter.
The tutor will have to be spoken to about the matter.
The matter will have to be spoken about.

b) argue, discuss, quarrel with [+human] about smth

Eg, He was arguing with his wife about the matter. (NO passive)

Intransitives with Adverbial modifiers

a) with locative and directional AdvP

- lie, be, remain, sit, stand – locative phrase

Eg. A book is on the table. / There is a book on the table.
Romania lies in Europe.
- directional phrase – and Adverbial phrase denoting the departure point, the destination point, the path or
the itinerary

Eg. I have been to Brasov. (destination)

Eg. Go (away, fro, to, towards, off)

Arrive (at, in)
Come (to, from)
Travel (from, to, through)
Swim (across)
Run (along)
NO passive

b) with adverbial phrases of time

- last The show lasted (for) two hours.

NO passive

c) with manner adverbials

- act, behave eg. He acted well.
He has always behaved decently.
NO passive

Intransitives with Quantifying Adverbs

- cost, weigh, owe (NO Passive)

Eg. The dress cost $100.

The apples weigh one pound.
- a dative pattern eg. I owe him $200.
The new car cost him $ 2000.

Reciprocal intransitives
Eg. The train and the bus collided.
The train collided with the bus.

TO – add, attach, correspond, join, relate

WITH – agree, associate, combine, collide, confer, connect, coincide, disagree, overlap
FROM – differ, distinguish, part, separate
(NO Passive)