Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

The Linguistic Review

Editor-in-Chief: van der Hulst, Harry


IMPACT FACTOR 2018: 0.463
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 0.789

CiteScore 2018: 0.69

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.643
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.679

Online
ISSN
1613-3676
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 36, Issue 3

Issues

Inchoatives in causative clothing

Change of state in Modern Hebrew heXYiZ

Itamar Kastner
  • Corresponding author
  • Department of English and American Studies, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Unter den Linden 6, 10099 Berlin, Germany
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2019-03-29 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/tlr-2019-2025

Abstract

The “causative” template heXYiZ in Hebrew is the morphological form of verbs which are usually transitive. I discuss cases in which specific roots give rise to the labile alternation, otherwise unattested in the language. A straightforward analysis is suggested for the majority of cases, based on causative Voice[+D]. This analysis is then extended to account for the labile exceptions, which inform how the idiosyncratic meaning of roots influences syntactic computation.

Keywords: degree achievement; causative; Hebrew; inchoative; morphology

References

  • Alexiadou, Artemis & Elena Anagnostopoulou. 2004. Voice morphology in the causative- inchoative alternation: Evidence for a non-unified structural analysis of unaccusatives. In Artemis Alexiadou, Elena Anagnostopoulou & Martin Everaert (eds.), The unaccusativity puzzle: Explorations of the syntax-lexicon interface, 114–136. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Alexiadou, Artemis & Edit Doron. 2012. The syntactic construction of two non-active voices: Passive and middle. Journal of Linguistics 48. 1–34.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Anagnostopoulou, Elena & Yota Samioti. 2014. Domains within words and their meanings: A case study. In Artemis Alexiadou, Hagit Borer & Florian Schäfer, (eds.), The syntax of roots and the roots of syntax, 81–111. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Arad, Maya. 2003. Locality constraints on the interpretation of roots: The case of Hebrew denominal verbs. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21. 737–778.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Arad, Maya. 2005. Roots and patterns: Hebrew morpho-syntax. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar

  • Bar-Asher Siegal, Elitzur & Nora Boneh. 2015. Decomposing affectedness: Truth-conditional non-core datives in Modern Hebrew. In Nurit Melnik (ed.), Proceedings of the 30th annual conference of the israel association for theoretical linguistics (IATL 30). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • Bar-Asher Siegal, Elitzur & Nora Boneh. 2016. Discourse update at the service of mirativity effects: The case of the discursive dative. In Mary Moroney, Carol-Rose Little, Jacob Collard & Dan Burgdorf (eds.), Semantics and linguistic theory (SALT), Vol. 26, 103–121. LSA and CLC Publications.Crossref

  • Béjar, Susana & Milan Rezac. 2009. Cyclic Agree. Linguistic Inquiry 40. 35–73.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Bobaljik, Jonathan David. 2012. Universals in comparative morphology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

  • Bolozky, Shmuel. 1982. Strategies of Modern Hebrew verb formation. Hebrew Annual Review 6. 69–79.Google Scholar

  • Borer, Hagit. 1991. The causative-inchoative alternation: A case study in Parallel Morphology. The Linguistic Review 8. 119–158.Google Scholar

  • Borer, Hagit. 2013. Structuring sense, vol. 3: Taking form. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Borer, Hagit & Yosef Grodzinsky. 1986. Syntactic cliticization and lexical cliticization: The case of Hebrew dative clitics. In Hagit Borer (ed.), Syntax and semantics, Vol. 19, 175–217. New York: Academic Press.

  • Deal, Amy Rose. 2015. Interaction and satisfaction in φ-agreement. In Thuy Bui and Deniz Özyıldız (eds.), Proceedings of NELS 45, 179–192. Amherst, MA: GLSA.

  • Doron, Edit. 2003. Agency and voice: The semantics of the Semitic templates. Natural Language Semantics 11. 1–67.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Dowty, David. 1991. Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67. 547–619.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ehrenfeld, Lior. 2012. The morphology of the Hebrew causative alternation. Jerusalem: Hebrew University of Jerusalem Master’s thesis.Google Scholar

  • Faust, Noam. 2012. Non-concatenative realization in the verbal inflection of Modern Hebrew. Morphology 22. 453–484.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Faust, Noam. 2016. Weak radicals, weak suppletion, and phonological indices in Semitic. Morphology 26. 379–397.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Gafter, Roey. 2014a. The distribution of the hebrew possessive dative construction: Guided by unaccusativity or prominence? Linguistic Inquiry 45. 482–500.Google Scholar

  • Gafter, Roey. 2014b. “The most beautiful and correct Hebrew”: Authenticity, ethnic identity and linguistic variation in the greater Tel Aviv area. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Doctoral Dissertation.

  • Halle, Morris & Alec Marantz. 1993. Distributed Morphology and the pieces of inflection. In Ken Hale & Samuel Jay Keyser (eds.), The view from building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, 111–176. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • Harley, Heidi. 2009. The morphology of nominalizations and the syntax of vP. In Monika Rathert & Anastasia Giannakidou (eds.), Quantification, definiteness and nominalization, 320–342. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Hay, Jennifer, Christopher Kennedy & Beth Levin. 1999. Scalar structure underlies telicity in “degree acheivements”. In T. Mathews & D. Strolovitch (eds.), Proceedings of semantics and linguistic theory (SALT IX), 127–144. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications.

  • Kastner, Itamar. 2016. Form and meaning in the Hebrew verb. New York, NY: New York University Doctoral Dissertation. Lingbuzz/003028.

  • Kastner, Itamar. 2017. Reflexive verbs in Hebrew: Deep unaccusativity meets lexical semantics. Glossa 2(75).Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Kastner, Itamar. 2018. Templatic morphology as an emergent property: Roots and functional heads in Hebrew. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory.Google Scholar

  • Kennedy, Christopher & Beth Levin. 2008. Measure of change: The adjectival core of degree achievements. In Louise McNally & Christopher Kennedy (eds.), Adjectives and adverbs: Syntax, semantics and discourse, 156–182. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Koontz-Garboden, Andrew. 2009. Anticausativization. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 27. 77–138.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Kratzer, Angelika. 1996. Severing the external argument from its verb. In Johan Rooryck & Laurie Zaring (eds.), Phrase structure and the lexicon, 109–137. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar

  • Laks, Lior. 2011. Morpho-phonological and morpho-thematic relations in Hebrew and Arabic verb formation. Tel-Aviv: Tel Aviv University Doctoral Dissertation.

  • Lev, Shaul. 2016. Hebrew labile alternation. Tel-Aviv: Tel Aviv University Master’s thesis.Google Scholar

  • Levin, Beth. 1993. English verb classes and alternations: A preliminary investigation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

  • Levin, Beth & Malka Rappaport Hovav. 1995. Unaccusativity: At the syntax–lexical semantics interface. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

  • Linzen, Tal. 2014. Parallels between cross-linguistic and language-internal variation in Hebrew possessive constructions. Linguistics 52. 759–792.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Marantz, Alec. 2013. Locality domains for contextual allomorphy across the interfaces. In Alec Marantz & Ora Matushansky (eds.), Distributed morphology today: Morphemes for morris halle, 95–115. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

  • Nie, Yining. 2017. Voice morphology and the features of transitivity. Ms., NYU. lingbuzz/003750.

  • Oseki, Yohei & Itamar Kastner. 2017. The trivalency of voice. In Cambridge workshop on Voice (CamVoice).Google Scholar

  • Preminger, Omer. 2013. That’s not how you agree: A reply to Zeijlstra. The Linguistic Review 30. 491–500.Google Scholar

  • Pylkkänen, Liina. 2008. Introducing arguments. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

  • Rotstein, Carmen & Yoad Winter. 2004. Total adjectives vs. partial adjectives: Scale structure and higher-order modifiers. Natural Language Semantics 12. 259–288.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Schäfer, Florian. 2008. The syntax of (anti-)causatives. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Schäfer, Florian. 2017. Romance and Greek medio-passives and the typology of Voice. In Roberta D’Alessandro, Irene Franco & Ángel Gallego (eds.), The verbal domain, 129–152. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Schwarzwald, Ora (Rodrigue). 1981a. dikduk u-metzi’ut ba-po’al ha-ivri [Grammar and reality in the Hebrew Verb]. Ramat Gan: Bar Ilan University Press.Google Scholar

  • Shlonsky, Ur. 1987. Null and displaced pronouns. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Doctoral Dissertation.Google Scholar

  • Trachtman, Einat. 2016. ha-gorem le-alternatsiot be-hafakat ha-tnu’a be-he ha-binjan be-tsurut he-’avar Sel binjan hif’il [The source of alternations in the production of the vowel on -h- in the past tense of hixyiz]. Haifa: University of Haifa Master’s thesis.Google Scholar

  • Wood, Jim. 2015. Icelandic morphosyntax and argument structure. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar

  • Zeijlstra, Hedde. 2012. There is only one way to agree. The Linguistic Review 29. 491–539.Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2019-03-29

Published in Print: 2019-09-25


Citation Information: The Linguistic Review, Volume 36, Issue 3, Pages 437–451, ISSN (Online) 1613-3676, ISSN (Print) 0167-6318, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/tlr-2019-2025.

Export Citation

© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in