Secondary Predication

Abstract

Abstract This chapter discusses secondary predication primarily from a syntactic perspective. We describe the two major types of secondary predicates, depictives and resultatives , proposing that so‐called circumstantials should be identified as depictives under the scope of a modal operator. We show that secondary predication, unlike clausal predication, is adjunct predication and is always thematic, with the secondary predicate assigning an external theta‐role to its subject. What makes the predication secondary is that the subject of the secondary predicate must be independently theta‐marked by another lexical head. We contrast secondary predication with clausal predication, and argue that there is no evidence to support a small clause analysis of secondary predicates. Instead, secondary predicates should be analyzed as AP (or PP) adjuncts that directly modify their subject. We review the syntactic position of these adjuncts, showing that they must be c‐commanded by their subjects. We also review the lexical constraints on choice of depictives and resultatives, and discuss briefly the semantic contrasts between them. Crucially, this explains the fact that while depictives can be predicated of either sentential subjects or direct objects, resultatives can only be predicated of VP‐internal arguments. We conclude by reviewing some recent publications on the topic.