Assignment of Macroroles to the Double Objects of Verbs of Transferring: A Role and Reference Grammar Perspective

Abstract

Ditransitive verbs that have two objects can be challenging when analyzed from the perspective of universal theories like Role and Reference Grammar (RRG) because each language deals with them in a different way. That is, each language has its own way to classify these verbs. This leads to some differences in the semantic role that each element performs in the sentence. RRG assumes two main macroroles for arguments in the clause: actor and undergoer. Therefore, the second object of a ditransitive verb is given the role of “non-macrorole direct core argument.” Haspelmath (2008) argues that two macroroles may not be enough to cover the cross-linguistic variations. Therefore, he suggests two additional macroroles. This paper, then, tackles the issue of role assignment in English and Arabic double-object constructions (DOCs) in the light of RRG taking into consideration Haspelmath’s suggestion. A limitation is made in this concern; it will be with ditransitive verbs that encode the action of receiving. It was concluded that the third argument of ditransitive verbs may not receive a non-macrorole direct core argument as the theory assumes, but can receive new roles that express the nature of the relationship between these arguments and their verbs.