Cover not available
Part of
Contrastive Studies in Verbal Valency
Edited by Lars Hellan, Andrej L. Malchukov and Michela Cennamo
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 237] 2017
► pp. 251–273

Object omission and the semantics of predicates in Italian in a comparative perspective

| University of Naples Federico II
This paper discusses the semantics of O(bject) omission with divalent verbs in Italian, in relation to (i) the interplay of the inherent and structural aspects of verb meaning with the degree of thematic specification of the subject (i.e., agentivity/control); (ii) the inherent characteristics of the O argument (e.g., animacy); (iii) the degree of semantic implication between the verb and O; (iv) the role played by the linguistic and extra-linguistic context. It is shown that object omission in Italian is highly sensitive to the event structure template of verbs (e.g., the low degree of aspectual specification of verbs) and the elements of meaning lexicalized in the verb, interacting, in turn, with other semantic and discourse-pragmatic parameters. Whereas the constraints on Indefinite Null Instantiation appear to be similar to those at work in other languages (e.g, English and French), those applying to Definite Null Instantiation display more variability.
Keywords: object omission, aspect, event structure, animacy, definiteness, referentiality, discourse pragmatics
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Object omission, event structure and transitivity: Some current issues and views
    • 2.1Event structure and the licensing of arguments
      • 2.1.1Structure vs constant/root participants and argument realization
    • 2.2The (in)transitivity continuum and the semanto-pragmatics of object omission
  • 3.The semantics of predicates and object omission in Italian
    • 3.1(Sub)types of object omission
      • 3.1.1Indefinite Null Instantiation (Perfective and imperfective contexts)
      • 3.1.2Indefinite Null Instantiation (Imperfective contexts only)
      • 3.1.3Definite Null Instantiation
      • 3.1.4Unexpressed objects and event structure in Italian
  • 4.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 30 April 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.237.08cen
References (51)
References
Allerton, David J. 1982. Valency and the English Verb. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Brisson, Christine. 1994. The licensing of Unexpressed objects in English verbs. CLS 30: 90–101.Google Scholar
Butt, Miriam & King, Tracy Holloway. 1997. Null elements in discourse structure. In Papers from the NULLS Seminar, Karumuri Venkata Subbarao (ed.). Delhi: Motilal Banarasidas.Google Scholar
Cennamo, Michela. 2003. (In)transitivity and object marking: Some current issues. In Romance Objects [Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 27], Giuliana Fiorentino (ed.), 49–104. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. Transitivi e intransitivi, verbi. In Enciclopedia dell'italiano, Vol II, Raffaele Simone (ed.), 535–539. Rome: Istituto dell'Enciclopedia Italiana G. Treccani.Google Scholar
. 2015. Valency patterns in Italian. In Malchukov & Comrie (eds), 417–81.Google Scholar
Cennamo, Michela & Lenci, Allesandro. Forthcoming. Gradience in subcategorization? Locative phrases with Italian verbs of motion. Studia Linguistica.
Comrie, Bernard. 1989. Language Universals and Linguistic Typology. Syntax and Morphology, 2nd edition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Coseriu, Eugenio 1971. Solidarietà lessicali. In Teoria del Linguaggio e Linguistica Generale. Sette Studi, 303–316. Bari: Laterza.Google Scholar
Croft, William. 2001. Radical Construction Grammar. Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cummings, Sarah & Roberge, Yves. 2005. A modular account of null objects in French. Syntax 8(1): 44–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Demonte, Violeta & McNally, Louise. 2012. Introduction. In Telicity, Change and State. A Cross-Categorial View of Event Structure, Violeta Demonte & Louise McNally (eds), 1–19. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Depraetere, Ilse. 1995. On the necessity of distinguishing between (un)boundedness and (a)telicity. Linguistics and Philosophy 18: 1–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dixon, Robert M.W. 1994. Ergativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dowty, David R. 1979. Word Meaning and Montague Grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Farrel, Peter. 1990. Null objects in Brazilian Portuguese. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 8: 325-46l. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. 1986. Pragmatically controlled zero anaphora. BLS 2: 95–107. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. & Kay, Paul. 1993. Construction Grammar Coursework, MS. Berkeley: University of California.Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E. 1995. Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
. 2005. Argument realization: The role of constructions, lexical semantics and discourse factors. In Construction Grammars. Cognitive Grounding and Theoretical Extensions [Constructional Approaches to Language 3], Jan-Ola Östman & Mirjam Fried (eds), 17–43. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. Constructions at Work. The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Grimshaw, Jane. 2005[1993]. Semantic structure and semantic content in lexical representation. In Words and Structure, Jane Grimshaw, 75–89. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 2015. Transitivity prominence. In Andrej Malchukov & Bernard Comrie (eds), 131–47. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koontz-Garboden, Andrew. 2012. The Monotonicity Hypothesis. In Telicity, Change and State. A Cross-Categorial View of Event Structure, Violeta Demonte & Louise McNally (eds), 139–161 Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jezek, Elisabetta. 2003. Classi di verbi tra semantica e sintassi. Pisa: ETS.Google Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud. 1994. Information Structure and Sentence Form. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud & Lemoine, Kevin. 2005. Definite null objects in (spoken) French: A construction grammar account. In Grammatical Constructions: Back to the Roots [Constructional Approaches to Language 4], Mirjam Fried & Hans C. Boas (eds), 13–56. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levin, Beth. 1993. English Verb Classes and Alternations. Chicago IL: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
. 1999. Objecthood: An event structure perspective. CLS 35: 222–247.Google Scholar
. 2000. Aspect, lexical semantic representation, and argument expression. BLS 26: 413–429. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. The structure of event structure. LSA, Berkeley, July 2009, Hand-out.Google Scholar
Levin, Beth & Rappaport Hovav, Malka. 2005. Argument Realization, Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lyngfelt, Benjamin. 2012. Rethinking FNI. On null instantiation and control in construction grammar. Constructions and Frames 4(1): 1–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lo Duca, Maria Giuseppa. 2000. Proprietà valenziali e criteri di descrizione lessicografica: Un caso di alternanza argomentale. Studi Italiani di Linguistica Teorica e Applicata 29(2): 219–242.Google Scholar
Malchukov, Andrej. 2015. Valency classes and alternations: parameters of variation. In Malchukov & Comrie (eds), 73–130.Google Scholar
Malchukov, Andrej & Comrie, Bernard (eds). 2015. Valency Patterns in the World’s Languages, Vol. 1. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Mithun, Marianne & Chafe Wallace. 1999. What are S, A and O?. Studies in Language 23: 569–596.Google Scholar
Olsen, Mari Broman & Resnik, Philip. 1997. Implicit object constructions and the (in)transitivity continuum. CLS 33: 327–336.Google Scholar
Pustejovsky, James. 1995. The Generative Lexicon. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rappaport Hovav, Malka. 2008 Lexicalized meaning and the internal temporal structure of events. In Crosslinguistic and Theoretical Approaches to the Semantics of Aspect [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 110], Susan D. Rothstein (ed.), 13–42. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. Building scalar changes. In The Syntax of Roots and the Roots of Syntax, Artemis Alexiadou, Hagit Borer & Florian Schäfer (eds), 259–81. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rappaport Hovav, Malka & Levin, Beth. 1998. Building verb meanings. In The Projection of Arguments, Miriam Butt & Wilhelm Geuder (eds), 97–134. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
. 2010. Reflections on Manner/Result complementarity. In Syntax, Lexical Semantics and Event Structure, Edit Doron, Malka Rappaport Hovav & Ivy Sichel (eds). Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruppenhofer, Josef & Michaelis, Laura A. 2010. A constructional account of genre-based argument omissions. Constructions and Frames 2(2): 158–184.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1986. Null objects in Italian and the theory of pro . Linguistic Inquiry 17(3): 501–557.Google Scholar
Sag, Ivan A. 2007. Sign-based Construction Grammar: An Informal Synopsis. Ms, Department of Linguistics, University of Stanford.Google Scholar
. 2010. English filler-gap constructions. Language 86: 486–545. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Valin, Robert D. Jr. 2005. Exploring the Syntax-Semantics Interface. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Valin, Robert D. Jr. & La Polla, Randy J. 1997. Syntax: Structure, Meaning and Function, Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vendler, Zeno. 1967. Linguistics in Philosophy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Wechsler, Stephen. 2015. Word Meaning and Syntax. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar