The English Dative Alternation E-Book

Susa Schnuck

• Herausgeber: GRIN Verlag
• Sprache: Englisch

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2015

Beschreibung

Seminar paper from the year 2014 in the subject English Language and Literature Studies - Linguistics, grade: 2,0, Humboldt-University of Berlin (Anglistik), course: Dative Alternation, language: English, abstract: Would you say you ‘...gave a stranger your phone number’ or does ‘...gave your phone number to a stranger’ sound better? In essence, this termpaper is trying to analyse this question. The grammatical phenomenon underlying which decribes those two constructions – the double object dative [a stranger] [your phone number] and the prepositional object dative [your phone number] [to a stranger] – is the so-called dative alternation. The term dative alternation has the ability to express the same event of giving with two specific structures, as shown above. The following paper will focus on the approaches of Krifka and Rappaport Hovav and Levin. At first, a definition of dative alternation will be given. Important facts, examples and a list of verbs, which allow or do not allow dative alternation, will be provided to give an overview of the topic. This term paper will also respond to the differences between the dative alternation and the benefactive alternation and will afterwards compare the two approaches on dative alternation. The main ideas of Krifka's “Semantic and Pragmatic Conditions for the Dative Alternation” (2003) and Rappaport Hovav's and Levin's “The English dative alternation: The case for verb sensitivity” (2008) will be presented and compared. Last but not least, I am going to introduce brief thoughts of dative alternation in the German language and how it is connected to the English dative alternation.

Leseprobe

Impressum:

Copyright (c) 2013 GRIN Verlag GmbH, alle Inhalte urheberrechtlich geschützt. Kopieren und verbreiten nur mit Genehmigung des Verlags.

Bei GRIN macht sich Ihr Wissen bezahlt! Wir veröffentlichen kostenlos Ihre Haus-, Bachelor- und Masterarbeiten.

Jetzt beiwww.grin.com

Contents

1. Introduction

2. The English dative alternation

2.1. Distribution of Verbs

2.2. The main views on the dative alternation

2.2.1. The Monosemy View

2.2.2. The HAVE-GOAL approach

2.2.3. The Information Structure View

2.2.4. Animacy

2.2.5. The benefactive alternation

3. Comparison of Krifka´s HAVE-GOAL approach and the verb-sensitive approach by Rappaport Hovav and Levin

3.1. Krifka´s HAVE-GOAL approach

3.2. The verb-sensitive approach by Rappaport Hovav and Levin

3.3. Comparison of the two approaches

4. The dative in German

5. Conclusion

Bibliography

1. Introduction

Would you say you ‘...gave a stranger your phone number’ or does ‘...gave your phone number to a stranger’ sound better? In essence, this termpaper is trying to analyse this question. The grammatical phenomenon underlying which decribes those two constructions – the double object dative [a stranger] [your phone number] and the prepositional object dative [your phone number] [to a stranger] – is the so-called dative alternation. The term dative alternation has the ability to express the same event of giving with two specific structures, as shown above.

The following paper will focus on the approaches of Krifka and Rappaport Hovav and Levin. At first, a definition of dative alternation will be given. Important facts, examples and a list of verbs, which allow or do not allow dative alternation, will be provided to give an overview of the topic. This term paper will also respond to the differences between the dative alternation and the benefactive alternation and will afterwards compare the two approaches on dative alternation. The main ideas of Krifka's “Semantic and Pragmatic Conditions for the Dative Alternation” (2003) and Rappaport Hovav's and Levin's “The English dative alternation: The case for verb sensitivity” (2008) will be presented and compared. Last but not least, I am going to introduce brief thoughts of dative alternation in the German language and how it is connected to the English dative alternation.

2. The English dative alternation

The term 'dative alternation' is known from the studies of argument structure and tries to explain two options for realising dative verbs (Levin 2008). In English these variants are called double object construction (DOC) and to-construction.  

Those two possible ways of expressing the dative in English, can be seen in examples (1a) and (1b). While (1a) exemplifies the DOC, (1b) demonstrates an example for the to-construction.

(1)  a. Ann sent Mary a letter.

 b. Ann sent a letter to Mary.

In the two examples above it is possible to express that Mary was sent a book by Ann in both construction-variants. However, this won’t work for all dative realisations.

2.1. Distribution of Verbs

After long years of research and collecting data about the topic, Levin published a list to show that there are verbs that are only relevant in the DOC, verbs that are only usable with the to-construction and verbs that can be used with both constructions.

According to Levin 1993 the following verb classes are only applicable in the double object construction:

“Dub verbs” like call, name, pronounce, label;

“Bill verbs” like spare, bet, tax; save

“Appoint verbs” like want, acknowledge, elect, consider

“Declare verbs” like suppose, assume, think, believe;

And another class of verbs that includes verbs like ask, cost, deny and forgive.

As shown in example (2), sentences (2a) and (2c) are possible, while (2b) and (2d) are not.

(2)  a. Mike called his guests a taxi.

 b. * Mike called a taxi to his guests.

 c. This saved him money and time.

 d. * This saved money and time to him.

According to his verb classification the following verb classes are only usable with the to-construction[1]:

“Verbs of putting with a specified direction” like lift, raise, drop, lower;

“Latinate verbs” like address, refer, deliver, transfer;

“Verbs of fulfilling” like entrust, provide, present;

“Say verbs” like communicate admit, report, articulate;

“Verbs of manner of speaking” like whisper, howl, yell;

To underline this thesis, the examples (3b) and (3d) show that this construction is grammatically correct, but (3a) and (3c) are not.

(3) a. * Sarah reported her friends the news.

 b. Sarah reported the news to her friends.

 c. * She entrusted me her secret.

 d. She entrusted her secret to me

Finally, Levin 1993 listed transitive verbs that can be used with both, the to- and the double object construction:

“Drive verbs” like fly drive, wheel; shuttle;

“Carry verbs” like kick carry, push; pull;