Locatum and location verbs in Lexeme—Morpheme base morphology

Abstract

Hale and Keyser's L exical A argument S tructure (LAS) (1993, 1997, 1998) is a currently influential hypothesis of verb derivation based entirely on the syntactic principles of head movement/incorporation (Travis, 1984/Baker, 1988). A specific claim of LAS concerns two types of denominal verbs: locatum, e.g., to saddle, from the syntax of the light verb to provide with, and location, e.g., to shelve, from the light verb to put. This article presents a reanalysis of locatum/location verbs within the framework of L exeme-M orpheme B ase M orphology (LMBM) (Beard, 1995). LMBM, one detailed realization of the type of lexeme-based morphology long advocated by Aronoff (1976, 1994), maintains a strict segregation of open-class lexical categories ( lexemes: adjectives, verbs and nouns) from closed-classes ( morphemes: adpositions, affixes, pronouns, etc.). By eliminating preposition as a lexical head of phrase, Prepositional Phrases (PP) must be reanalyzed as either Noun Phrase (NP) or Adjective Phrase (AP), a distinction which allows us to take advantage of insights provided by Kiparsky (1997), who notes that syntax of the type assumed by Hale and Keyser is incapable of distinguishing non-existent from existing locatum/location verbs. In addition to the syntactic distinctions provided by LMBM, the adoption of the notion telic role, “information about the use or purpose of an object” (Pustejovsky, 1995: 86), as part of the semantic representation of nouns, provides a mechanism to account for Kiparsky's observation that a denominal locatum/location verb must be derived from a “canonical use” of the base (Kiparsky, 1997: 482). In contrast with Hale and Keyser's arguments for syntactic sufficiency and Kiparsky's call for reliance on semantic principles, however, we argue in accord with LMBM's strict modularity that both syntax and semantics have a role.