Abstract
The purpose of this paper is intended to argue that the dative verb cwu ‘give’ serves two different functions in syntax: benefactive and causative cwu’s. Depending on whether the dative verb cwu or the benefactive suffix (a/e)cwu functions as a head of v or not, it exhibits distinct behavior with respect to the accusative-marked goal. In the typical dative verb cwu-constructions, the Goal and the Theme DPs are marked by the dative and accusative case, respectively, while the Goal DP never allows the accusative case. Both the dative and the accusative goals in the causative cwu-construction bear caused ownership of the theme as a patient (i.e., causee). The distinction between the dative-marked goals and the accusative-marked goals is that only the latter bears specificity in the outer spec of vP. The terminal node v is split into two pieces with the causative and benefactive features, which provides evidence that the benefactive suffix (a/e)cwu bearing a beneficiary is base-generated on v, serving two functions in syntax. In this paper, I made an attempt to support my arguments with some unique evidence.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call