DERIVING THE DIRECT OBJECT RESTRICTION

抄録

Resultative constructions are argued to have a generalization called the Direct Object Restriction (DOR) that states that a resultative predicate is predicated of only a direct object. Some literature argues against the generalization, and claims that the DOR is not attainable. However, Matushansky et al. (2012) provide the syntactic evidence for the DOR. Following them, this paper shows additional evidence in favor of the DOR, and that counter-examples to the DOR are not of the typical type of resultative constructions. Moreover, I argue that some modifications should be made in their proposal, and propose that a functional head forms a resultative predicate by taking a predicative XP as its complement and the semantic subject of XP in its specifier.