The Structure of Bounded Events

Abstract

To explain the semantic and syntactic compositionality of bounded interpretations, I propose here that events with a definite end point involve interpretation of the verb and either a bounded direct object or a bounded PP in the checking domain of Asp(ect)P, whereas unbounded events involve interpretation in a projection lower in the clause. This analysis explains the syntactic behavior of the ambiguous adverb quickly. In addition, it follows from the analysis that durative adjuncts are adjoined to VP, while time frame adjuncts are adjoined to AspP. Constructions involving preposition stranding, scope of only, parasitic gaps, and semantic restrictions on adjunct PP objects support this approach.This article is concerned with how semantic information regarding aktionsart is represented in the syntax. The term aktionsart, or aspect, refers to the internal temporal structure of events. 1 An example of an aspectual distinction is the contrast between (1a) and (1b); in (1a), the event of writing is viewed as continuous, whereas in (1b), the event of writing is viewed as finished.(1) a. Mary was writing a book.b. Mary wrote a book.I propose here that, assuming the minimalist framework, a syntactic analysis of contrasts such as that between (1a) and (1b) is available in terms of feature checking; events with a definite end point such as the one in (1b) involve interpretation of the verb and either a bounded direct object or a bounded PP in the checking domain of Asp(ect)P, whereas events with no end point specified such as the one in (1a) require that VP constituents be located in a projection lower in the clause than AspP for interpretation.Evidence for this structural distinction comes from the syntactic distribution of the ambiguous adverb quickly, which can modify either the manner or the end point of an event. I argue that when quickly modifies the manner, it is adjoined to VP, and when it modifies the end point, it is adjoined to AspP. This approach explains certain linear order restrictions and preposing facts involving quickly.Next, I investigate the syntax of durative and time frame adjuncts, arguing that, depending on whether the adjunct modifies the duration or the end point of the event, it is adjoined to VP or to AspP. Data involving preposition stranding, scope of only, and parasitic gap constructions I would like to thank the following people for discussion of the ideas presented here: Stefan Engelberg, Norbert Hornstein, Nobue Mori, Jairo Nunes, and Juan Uriagereka. I am grateful to two anonymous reviewers for very helpful comments on this article. 1 The term event used here is a generic term intended to include different aspectual types; it does not refer to a particular aspectual class (e.g., events vs. states).

The Aspectual Influence of the Noun: (A)telicity, (A)symmetry, Incrementality and Universality

“…Additionally, note that these predicates are now telic, because the PP adds an endpoint (or delimiter), as has been widely observed (Borer 2005; Dowty 1979; Folli 2000; Folli and Ramchand 2001; Gerhke 2008; Krifka 1992; MacDonald 2008a,b; Pustejovsky 1991; Ritter and Rosen 1998; Thompson 2005, 2006; Tungseth 2005; Zwarts 2005). Now, as MacDonald (2008a, b) observes, when a MN direct object is present, these predicates become atelic, illustrated in (7).…”

Adverbs of Change, Aspect, and Underspecification

“…It has been noticed that adverbs of change can give rise to a wide range of interpretations (Cresswell 1978;Travis 1988;Pustejovsky 1991;Shaer 1998;Tenny 2000;Schäfer 2002;Ernst 2004;Thompson 2006;Kearns 2007;Eszes 2009;Rawlins 2013). Although there is little agreement on what these interpretations are, they seem to fall into the following categories (although not necessarily under the same labels): (i) rate, (ii) duration, (iii) narrative, and (iv) deictic/indexical.…”

“…When modifying activity predicates, such adverbs can only have rate readings. As Thompson (2006) points out, (13) means that John moved fast while pushing the cart and cannot have, say, a durative interpretation, whereby the action of pushing the cart took a short period of time. Rawlins (2013) makes similar remarks about (14).…”

“…As far as I know, the distinction between dynamic vs. non-dynamic activities has not been much explored in the aspectual literature. 5 Cresswell (1978), Thompson (2006), and Rawlins (2013) claim that, when combined with accomplishment predicates, adverbs of change are ambiguous between rate vs. duration readings. According to Cresswell, the rate reading of (17) says that John walked quickly and his walking was to the station, while the duration reading of (17) says that John's walking was a quick walking to the station.…”

“…This paper develops a formal account of rate and duration readings for quickly, and also recognizes the existence of narrative readings. Subsequent research has tried to attribute available readings to structural or lexical ambiguities (Travis 1988;Pustejovski 1991;Tenny 2000;Schäfer 2002;Ernst 2004;Thompson 2006;Kearns 2007;Eszes 2009). Rawlins (2013) offers the most elaborate discussion to date and systematically investigates the interaction between adverbs of change and aspectual class.…”