Mármol – Scaletta – Soto 2014 ADJECTIVE SELECTION IN RESULTATIVE CONSTRUCTIONS

ADJECTIVE SELECTION IN RESULTATIVE CONSTRUCTIONS

WECHSLER´S FORMAL MODEL

 Homomorphism and coextension between the verb and the path are required if the host is
subcategorised by the verb. (Case 1)
 Homomorphism and coextension between the verb and the path are not required if the host is not
subcategorised by the verb. (Case 2)

WHAT DO THESE TERMS MEAN?

Homomorphism: Parts of the verbal event must correspond to parts of the path and vice versa. For
example, in (1) above, Sally wiped the table clean, parts of the event of wiping correspond to parts of the
event of the table’s becoming clean, i.e. the path metonymically signalled by the adjective clean (which
denotes its final point).

Coextension: The term coextension in the definitions above makes it clear that the verbal event must
begin when the affected theme is at the start of the change path and end when the affected theme reaches
the end of the change path. For instance, in Sally wiped the table clean, as the table is being wiped, the
table is becoming clean because there is less dirt on it after each wiping.

Wechsler´s model predicts 2 ways in which the verbal event can interact with the resultative phrase (which
expresses the telic path).

CASE 1

SUBCATEGORIZED ARGUMENTS (When the theme argument is selected by the verb, as in “Jesus wiped
the table”. (The D.O. the table is selected by the transitive verb wiped).

There are 3 types of CASE 1 sentences:

TYPE I

It combines a durative verb with a durative adjective.

He wiped the table clean =wiped > Durative event + clean >durative adjective.

As wipe is a durative verb, in order to obtain homomorphism between the verb and the path hinted at by the
resultative adjective a durative adjective must be selected.

Therefore, we need:

 Durative verb
 Durative adjective
Página 1 de 4
Mármol – Scaletta – Soto 2014 ADJECTIVE SELECTION IN RESULTATIVE CONSTRUCTIONS

 The adjective must be gradable (e.g. clean > cleaner) and closed-scale (e.g. completely clean).

According to Wechsler, this explains why the sentence “*The rabbits had been battered dead” is
ungrammatical. The verb batter (durative) cannot co-occur with the punctual adjective dead. Let us remember
that the adjective MUST be DURATIVE. The path encoded by dead has no extension.

TYPE II

It combines a punctual verbal event and an adjective.

 Punctual verb
 Punctual adjective

For example: Tom shot the lawyer dead.

The path encoded by the verb shot and the one encoded by the adjective dead have no extension. The verb,
in the sentence above, is read as punctual.

TYPE III

It combines a verbal event interpreted as durative and a prepositional phrase.

 Durative verb (or interpreted as such)

 Durative prepositional phrase

Example: Tom shot the baker to death.

As we can see, the verb shot is now interpreted as durative because of the PP to death. Let us take into
account that, according to Wechsler, PPs always code durative events.

CASE 2

UNSUBCATEGORISED ARGUMENTS (cases where the object is not a possible object for the verb used in
isolation).

Tom laughed himself silly (cf. *Tom laughed himself)

These sentences do not imply homomorphism, i.e., homomorphism is not required.

For example, Tom danced his legs stiff.

In the sentence above, the physical sensation referred to by the adjective (stiff) and predicated of Tom´s legs
may have been felt by him the next morning. This means that there is no homomorphism nor coextension.

Therefore, the fact that homomorphism is not required implies that any adjective in case 2 sentences, is
potentially suitable.

Página 2 de 4
Mármol – Scaletta – Soto 2014 ADJECTIVE SELECTION IN RESULTATIVE CONSTRUCTIONS

Some problems for Wechsler´s approach

By considering Wechsler´s approach, it can be seen that it runs into several problems when confronted with a
large member of different data from various sources.

Impossible classification
There are some examples that violate Wechsler’s classification

a) They [battered durative verb] him [senseless non-gradable scale adjective]

b) Sam [cut interpreted iteratively] the bread [thin non-closed scale]
c) He [folded non-punctual action] this note up very [small non-closed scale adjective]

As far as we can see, all these examples should be classified as Type 1 [combination of durative verbal
event + an adjective phrase = for homomorphism, the adjective must be gradable and closed-scale]
because they contain adjectives and verbs that are durative (or interpreted as such). The example a) contains
a durative verb (batter), but a non-gradable scale adjective is used (*very senseless). The event denoted by
cut (b) is to be interpreted iteratively but the adjective thin is a non-closed scale one (*completely thin). The
example is c) cannot be regarded as Type 1 either: fold clearly denotes a non-punctual action but small,
although gradable, is a not closed scale adjective (*completely small)

BROCCIAS´S GENERALIZATIONS

Broccias propose various generalizations which, according to him, are compatible with most resultative
constructions. Let us analyse some of Broccias´ generalizations.

1) Iconicity: If the time span of the verbal subevent is relatively short, an AP is used when there is one.
Otherwise, the resultative phrase is a PP.

The police officer shot the burglar {dead/*to death}. (The time spam of the verb is short, thus an AP is used).

He danced himself {to fame/*famous}. (The time spam of the verb is rather long, thus, a PP is used)

2) Phonological length: If an adjective is used with a prolonged event, then the adjective is phonologically
shorter than the related preposition’s complement.

This constraint explains the preference of the prepositional phrase over the adjectives. Even though iconicity
would predict the opposite pattern, phonological length militates against it. In addition, an abstract-versus-
concrete opposition will also play a role in deciding between these two choices.

3) Permanent properties:

Contrasts in acceptability do not only obtain between the uses of an adjective versus a prepositional phrase in
the same sentence but also involve the use of the same adjective in two syntactically similar sentences.
Consider (1) and (2):

(1) a. John painted the fence red.

Página 3 de 4
Mármol – Scaletta – Soto 2014 ADJECTIVE SELECTION IN RESULTATIVE CONSTRUCTIONS

b. *John hammered the metal red.

(2) a. John hammered the metal shiny.

b. *John chiselled the ice shiny.

The contrasts in (1) and (2) are not expected given Wechsler’s model since hammer, paint, and chisel all
denote prolonged events and the adjectives red and shiny are both gradable and closed-scale (cf. very
{red/shiny}, completely {red/shiny}).

4) The experiential generalisation: Resultative adjectives (in non-colloquial usage) refer to non-aesthetic-that
is, objective-(e.g. She painted the room {red/*beautiful}), necessarily perceivable (e.g. She hammered the
metal flat vs. *She loaded the cart heavy) properties.

Página 4 de 4