Cover not available

In:Verb Classes and Aspect
Edited by Elisa Barrajón López, José Luis Cifuentes Honrubia and Susana Rodríguez Rosique
[IVITRA Research in Linguistics and Literature 9] 2015
► pp. 312–333

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
authorization required

Romance object-experiencer verbs

From aktionsart to activity hierarchy

Published online: 25 November 2015
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ivitra.9.14kai
The present paper deals with Romance Objective-Experiencer verbs (OE-verbs). I will show that the different subclasses fit into a continuum between a causative and an unaccusative pole. In order to describe their varying syntactic behaviour, a finer-grained analysis of the subevents they denote will elucidate that a traditional approach following the Vendler-Dowty classes of aktionsart will reach its limit when it comes to OE-verbs. My claim is that case assignment to the experiencer does not straightforwardly follow from the aktionsart class, but from the activity contrast between the two arguments of the verb. The presence or absence of causativity explains the differentiation between two types of ­experiencer: (a) a more passive causatively affected experiencer and (b) a less passive experiencer undergoing a change of state in a particular situation without being affected by an external causer. In addition, we find a third type of OE-verb: prototypically unaccustative (ergative) verbs, such as verbs of liking, which select a more active experiencer expressing a subjective judgement. These three types constitute prototypical categories with fuzzy edges. Romance languages differ in the way they code the three types at the lexical level and at the level of the constructional inventory. The results can be formalized following the activity hierarchy approach (Kailuweit 2013).
References (44)
Arad, Maya. 1998. “Psych-Notes.” UCL Working papers in linguistics 10: 203–222.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Belletti, Andrea and Rizzi, Luigi. 1988. “Psych Verbs and Theta Theory.” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bialy, Adam. 2005. Polish Psychological Verbs at the Lexicon-Syntax Interface in Cross Linguistic Perspective. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blum, Laurence A. 1980. Friendship, Altruism, and Morality. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cançado, Márcia. 1995. “A teoria da proeminência de Grimshaw e os psico-verbos do portugûes brasileiro.” D.E.L.T.A. 11/2: 279–299.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carlson, Gregory N. 1978. Reference to kinds in English. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cifuentes, José Luis. This volume. “Causativity and Psychological Verbs in Spanish.”
Di Desidero, Linda. 1993. “Psych Verbs and the Nature of Complex Events.” Northwestern Working Papers in Linguistics 5: 11–22.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dowty, David. 1979. Word Meaning and Montague Grammar. The Semantics of Verbs and Times in Generative Semantics and in Montague’s PTQ. Dortrecht: Reidel. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1991. “Non-Verbal Thematic Proto-Roles.” Language 67 (3): 547–619. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ekman, Paul. 1994. “All Emotions Are Basic.” In Ekman, Paul & Davidson, Richard J. (eds.), The Nature of Emotion: Fundamental Questions. New York: Oxford University Press, 15–19.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Filip, Hana. 2012. “Lexical Aspect.” In The Oxford Handbook of Tense and Aspect, R.I. Binnick (ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Foley, William A. & Van Valin, Robert D. 1984. Functional syntax and universal grammar. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grimshaw, Jane. 1990. Argument structure. Cambridge, MA / London: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Härtl, Holden. 2001. Cause und Change: thematische Relationen und Ereignisstrukturen in Konzeptualisierung und Grammatikalisierung. Berlin: Akademieverlag. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kailuweit, Rolf. 2005. Linking: Syntax und Semantik französischer und italienischer Gefühlsverben. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2007. “El enlace de los verbos de sentimiento – un cálculo de rasgos.” In Cano López, Pablo (Ed.), Actas del VI Congreso de Lingüística General, Santiago de Compostela, 3–7 de mayo de 2004, Vol. 2, Tomo 1, 2007 (Las lenguas y su estructura (IIa)), 1699–1708.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. “Radical Role and Reference Grammar (RRRG): A Sketch for Remodelling the Syntax-Semantics-Interface.” In Linking Constructions into Functional Linguistics. The Role of Constructions in Grammar, B. Nolan and E. Diedrichsen (eds.), 103–141. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kratzer, Angelika. 1989. “An investigation of the lumps of thought.” In Linguistics and Philosophy 12 (5): 607–653. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Landau, Idan. 2002. The Locative Syntax of Experiencers. Ms. Ben Gurion University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010. The Locative Syntax of Experiencers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marín, Rafael. 2011. “Casi todos los predicados psicológicos son estativos.” In Sobre estados y estatividad, A. Carrasco (ed.), 26–44. München: Lincom.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Martin, Fabienne. 2002. “La préposition de du complément d’agent des verbes psychologiques causatifs : un génitif.” Scolia 15: 57–70.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Martín, Juan. 1998. “The Lexico-Semantic Interface: Psych Verbs and Psych Nouns.” Hispania 81: 619–631. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mathieu, Yannik Y. 2000. Les verbes de sentiment. De l’analyse linguistique au traitement automatique. Paris: CNRS.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nissenbaum, Helen F. 1985. Emotion and Focus. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pesetsky, David. 1995. Zero Syntax: Experiencers and Cascades. Cambrigde, MA/London: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pylkkänen, Liina. 2000. “On Stativity and Causation.” In Events as Grammatical Objects. The Converging Perspectives of Lexical Semantics and Syntax, C. Tenny and J. Pustojovsky (eds.), 417–444. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reinhart, Tanya. 2001. Experiencing Derivations. [[URL]].Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2002. “The Theta system – Overview.” Theoretical Linguistics 28 (3): 229–290.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rozwadowska, Bożena. 1988. “Thematic Restrictions on Derived Nominals.” In Syntax and Semantics 21. Thematic Relations, W. Wilkins (ed.), 147–165. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruwet, Nicolas. 1972. “A propos d’une classe de verbes ‘psychologiques’.” In Théorie syntaxique et syntaxe du français, N. Ruwet (ed.), 181–251. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1994. “Être ou ne pas être un verbe de sentiment.” Langue Française 103: 45–55. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1995. “Les verbes de sentiment peuvent-ils être agentifs?” Langue Française 105: 28–39. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Searle, John R. 1983. Intentionality. An Essay in the Philosophy of Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tenny, Carol. 1994. Aspectual Roles and the Syntax-Semantics Interface. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Valin, Robert D. and LaPolla, Randy J. 1997. Syntax. Structure, Meaning and Function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Voorst, Jan. 1992. “The Aspectual Semantics of Psychological Verbs.” Linguistics and Philosophy 15: 65–92. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1995. “Le contrôle de l’espace psychologique.” Langue Française 105: 17–27. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vanhoe, Henk. 2002. Aspectos de la sintaxis de los verbos psicológicos en español. Un análisis léxico funcional. Dissertation. Universiteit Gent.
Verkuyl, H.J. 1989. “Aspectual Classes and Aspectual Composition.” Linguistics and Philosophy 12: 39–94. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vermandere, Dieter. 2002. I verbi psicologici italiani. Uno studio semantico e sintattico. Dissertation. Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wanner, Anja. 2001. “The Optimal Linking of Arguments: The Case of English Psychological Verbs.” In Competition in Syntax, Müller Gereon & Sternefeld, Wolfgang (eds.), 377–399. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Whitley, Stanley M. 1995. “Gustar and Other Psych Verbs. A Problem in Transitivity.” Hispania 78: 573–585. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Vázquez Rozas, Victoria & José M. García-Miguel
2025. Case Marking Alternation with Psychological Verbs in Spanish: Combining Different Corpus Data Sources. In How to Do Things with Corpora [Linguistik in Empirie und Theorie/Empirical and Theoretical Linguistics, ], ► pp. 411 ff. DOI logo
Cançado, Márcia, Luana Amaral, Letícia Meirelles & Maria José Foltran
2024. Psych verbs: the behavior of ObjExp verbs in Brazilian Portuguese. Linguistics 62:1 ► pp. 121 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue