Hyponymous arguments

I discuss the structural puzzle raised by hyponymous arguments in light of a syntactic head movement analysis of denominal and deadjectival verbs (cf. Hale & Keyser 1993 et seq.), which are argued to involve the incorporation into a verbal (v) head of a lexical element initially merged as (part of) v’s complement. The appearance of an overt phrasal argument in the syntactic position that should be occupied by the trace left by the incorporated item constitutes a problem for such analysis, as a process of countercyclic insertion seems to be involved. Assuming that the incorporating element is a root and further drawing on a distinction between roots and functional heads whereby only the latter are relational elements giving rise to semantic construals in syntax (Mateu 2002, Borer 2005, Acedo-Matellán 2016, i.a.), I put forth an analysis of hyponymous arguments ​​as elements that are directly merged with a root before functional heads such as v are introduced in the structure, the root labeling the output of this merge operation. The absence of a functional head mediating the relation between the root and the phrasal argument derives the requirement that the latter be interpreted as hyponymous to the root at LF. I further explore the licensing of hyponymous arguments in a variety of argument structural configurations.  

References.

Acedo-Matellán, Víctor. 2016. The morphosyntax of transitions: A case study in Latin and other languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Borer, Hagit. 2005. The normal course of events: Structuring sense, vol. 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hale, Kenneth & Samuel Jay Keyser. 1993. On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations. In Kenneth Hale and Samuel Jay Keyser (eds.), The view from building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, 53–109. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Mateu, Jaume. 2002. Argument structure: Relational construal at the syntax-semantics interface. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona dissertation.