Verb Alternations: Body-Part, Causative, and Dative Shifts

Verb Alternations in English

The body-part possessor ascension alternation is characterized by a change in the expression of a possessed body part. The possessed body part may be expressed as the direct object of the verb (e.g., Margaret cut Bill’s arm), or the possessor may be expressed as the object of the verb with the possessed body part expressed in a prepositional phrase (e.g., Margaret cut Bill on the arm).

Examples:

• NPagent Verb [NP’s body-part]theme: Margaret cut [Bill’s arm].
• B-p possessor ascension construction: NPagent Verb [NPtheme] [on the body-part]: Margaret cut [Bill] [on the arm].

The body-part possessor ascension requires a sub-event ACT that involves contact. Consequently, "break" verbs typically do not participate in this alternation.

Causative/Inchoative Alternation

In the causative/inchoative alternation, some verbs (called ergative verbs) can have an intransitive pattern (the inchoative construction) whose subject has the thematic role of the object of the transitive use (the causative construction) of the verb. Unlike in the middle construction, this does not have to include adverbial or modal modification.

Examples:

• Causative construction: NPagent Verb NPpatient
• Inchoative construction: NPpatient Verb

The enemy sank the boat. (causative)
The boat sank. (inchoative)

Dative Alternation

In the dative alternation, some ditransitive verbs allow two alternatives for the realization of their internal arguments: the prepositional dative construction and the double object construction.

• The prepositional dative construction: the indirect object (IO) is non-adjacent to the verb and is introduced by a preposition (e.g., Bob made the cake for Phil).
• The double object construction: the IO is realized as an NP adjacent to the verb and is followed by the direct object (DO) (e.g., Bob made Phil the cake).

Pinker (1989) proposes that this difference in the syntactic realization of the arguments is related to a semantic difference: the double object construction is possible with verbs in which the indirect object is not only the goal of the movement of the DO, but also its possessor (the so-called possessor effect), i.e., when the IO gets a recipient thematic role. This is clearly not the case in John sent the parcel to London, hence the ungrammaticality of *John sent London a parcel.