Involuntary state constructions in Polish: a case of
semantic-syntactic interface
Anna Malicka-Kleparska
1. Introduction
Interfaces in language can be understood in at least two ways: they may be looked for
in the linguistic material, where certain structures are mixtures of e.g. phrasal and
lexical elements, or lexical and sub-lexical ones (and such examples abound in
Polish), or, alternately, they can be traced in the integration and co-functioning of
traditional grammatical subcomponents (e.g. semantics and syntax), as is the case in
current approaches to semantic-syntactic investigations within generative grammar,
fuelled by works by e.g. Marantz (1984), Kratzer (1996), Heim and Katzer (1998),
Pylkkänen (2008) etc. We have selected both of these options to talk about interfaces,
and thus we will take up selected argument structure/valency phenomena in Polish and
analyse them in the light of what we view as major insights of Heim and Kratzer’s
(1998) Semantics in Generative Grammar.1
To substantiate the above pronouncements, let us give some indication as to the
type of material and type of theory that we have in mind. Certain transitive and
anticausative2 structures in Polish can serve as the simplest example of the interfaces.
Here the same meaning can be expressed with the use of either the standard syntactic
structure: SVO – Oni spakowali rzeczy ‘They have packed up their things’, or with the
use of a lexically expressed anticausative predicate, e.g. pakować się ‘pack up things’,
incorporating in its meaning the notion of the object – Oni spakowali się ‘They have
packed up their things’. Thus, the sentence with both the complex predicate and the
overt object is ungrammatical: *Oni spakowali się rzeczy. The first sentence contains
the full-fledged ingredients of a syntactic structure, all clearly realised as lexical items,
while in the second the object is covert. This transformation affects the form of the
linguistic expression and it is morphologically marked by the clitic, pseudo-reflexive
element się, which in itself belongs to the interface of morphology and phonology, as
it is semi-independent of the lexical verb.3 The semantic properties of the structure do
not change along with the formal reshufflings, contrary to our expectations in such
cases.
Of course the opposite situations also occur, i.e. there are such cases where, at first
glance, a change of meaning does not require a structural change. For instance, the
sentence Piotr pakuje may equally well stand for ‘Peter is packing things up’, where
two arguments participate in the situation (Agent – Peter, Theme – Things), and for
1
We will also take theoretical notions liberally from Rivero (2009) and Rivero, Arregui and
Frąckowiak (2010).
2
Anticausative derivations reduce the number of arguments appearing with a verb, disposing
of the syntactically stated direct object. See e.g. Comrie (1985: 319–322), Dixon (2000: 6–11).
3
Się does not have separate word stress and it must accompany a verbal element, but unlike
true affixes it can precede or follow the verb more or less freely, e.g. On się pakuje ‘He is
packing up’ vs. On pakuje się od dwu godzin ‘He has been packing up for two hours’. For
details see, e.g. Szober (1962), Wróbel (1984), Kardela (1985), Bułat (2004), Szymanek (2010)
etc.
‘Peter is working out’ with a single participant (Agent). In this paper we will consider
the problems of matching most efficiently semantic and morphosyntactic
representations, so that the interfaces are expedient for a very problematic group of
Involuntary-state constructions (ISCs) in Polish.
The framework we have chosen seems to be ideal for dealing with such interfaces,
as it is generative semantics in the tradition of Heim and Kratzer (1998), where no
distinction is drawn between intra- and inter-lexical levels and where semantic
structures freely permeate syntactic and lexical entities. In other words, for a semantic
interpretation it does not matter whether on the plain of form we are dealing with a
lexical item, a bound morpheme or a phonologically unrealised formal marker.
2. Theoretical background (Semantics in Generative Grammar, Heim and
Kratzer 1998)
Most seminal work in the interface area between syntactic structures and semantic
investigations seems to have been done within Heim and Kratzer’s tradition of
Semantics in Generative Grammar (1998). In this approach, the essential role is
played by denotations, which have lexical representations and these, in turn, are
combined into complex structures according to certain principles. Denotations may
represent individuals, truth values, and functions from individuals to truth values.
Then, in the lexicon we have denotations (also called extensions) of elements, e.g. (p.
15) [[Ann]], which stands for an individual called Ann, 1 standing for true and 0 for
false, and functions, which are represented by verbs (among others). For instance, the
denotation: [[smokes]] equals the function f: the set D (individuals, e.g. Ann) → to {0,
1}, the set of truth values, for all such x’s, where x belongs to D, f(x) is true (equals 1)
if and only if x smokes.
The other sub-system in this semantic component consists of three general
principles (Heim and Kratzer 1998: 43–44):

Terminal Nodes (TN)
If α is a terminal node, [[α]] is specified in the lexicon.
This should be interpreted in the way that each terminal node in a structure must have
its own lexical representation.4

Non-Branching Nodes (NN)
If α is a non-branching node, and β is its daughter node, then [[α]] = [[β]].
That is, the non-branching node denotes the same as its terminal lexical representation.

4
Functional Application (FA)
If α is a branching node, [ γ] is the set of α’s daughters, and [[β]] is a function
whose domain contains [[ γ]], then [[α]] = [[β]]([[ γ]])
If taken rigorously, the principle should imply that there are no lexically empty terminal
nodes, the result deserving careful consideration.
This principle reads that if we are dealing with a branching node, one daughter stands
for the function from an argument to its truth value, and the other for the argument
belonging to the domain of this function. A further consequence of the above system
is that language structures are predicted to be, at most, binary. In other words, all
structures that might look different are in fact reducible to binary divisions. For
instance, a structure with a transitive verb might look as if it were not binary, as it
contains the subject, the verbal element and the object. However, in this system it will
be perceived as consisting of two binary levels of one hierarchy. For instance (p. 27), a
transitive verb, as in x likes y, has the denotation of two functions, e.g. f and g. F is a
function from individuals in a given domain to function g, while g is a function from
individuals in the same domain to truth values, whose truth value is 1 iff x likes y.
This view of semantic representation is in agreement with the assumption that the
external argument and its VP constitute one layer of a sentence structure, while the
internal argument is in a closer commune with the verbal node (see Marantz 1984),
and both layers are strictly binary. Of course, it is not possible to present the theory
even in a most general way within the limits of this paper, but the structures and
notations we will be using and quoting here are rooted in this tradition.
The theory will be seen at work below when we consider the concrete linguistic
material which consists of the so called ISCs (Involuntary-state constructions) in
Polish. A reference point will be supplied by an analysis of these constructions as
presented in Rivero, Arregui and Frąckowiak (2010).
3. Introducing the linguistic material: ISCs (Involuntary-state constructions) in
Polish
Inoluntary-state constructions of the type analysed in Rivero, Arregui and Frąckowiak
(2010: 704–705) constitute a very interesting and semantically varied group of
structures in Polish:
(1)
Marta
chciała zjeść ciastko, a jej
się
kichnęło.
Marta
wanted to eat a cookie but she.DAT REFL sneezed.NEU
‘Marta wanted to eat a cookie, but she suddenly had to sneeze.’
(2)
Napisało
mi
się
własne imię.
wrote.NEU I.DAT REFL own
name.ACC
‘I wrote my own name (by chance).’
The form of these structures is characterised by the presence of an argument in the
Dative case, whose function is established with respect to the event specified by the
verbal element. In the example in (1) the dative argument is something like the Theme
of the event, the involuntary undergoer of the activity. In example (2) the dative
argument resembles an involuntary agent of the activity, where by chance refers to the
fact of writing one’s own name. Yet another different interpretation is connected with
examples like (3) below:
(3)
Tańczyło mi
się dobrze.
danced I.DAT REFL well
‘I danced well and the dancing was good.’
Here the dative argument clearly represents the Agent of the activity, and the by
chance interpretation present in (1) and (2) is by no means obligatory in (3), as we
may have sentences like:
(4)
Tańczyło mi się dobrze, ponieważ dobrze odpoczęłam.
‘I danced well, as I had taken a rest.’
Other points of interest include the appearance of the verb in the singular neuter,
the form that in these examples shows no predilection for agreeing with any of the
arguments present in the structure. Such singular neuter predicates may constitute
default, elsewhere, verbal forms5 in Polish, frequently used for impersonal6
constructions, though we would like to stress here that they are not identical with
infinitives (a fact which we will show to be vital in section 5.1.3). Neuter verbs also
appear in Polish in another kind of impersonal constructions, created with biargumental verbs of the canonical Causer verb Theme structure (with well understood
Causer, and well seen effect exerted on the Theme), e.g. (from Laskowski 1984: 147):
(5)
Złamało
mu
nogę
broke.NEU he.DAT leg.ACC
‘His leg got broken (by sth understood).’7
Consequently, the 3rd person neuter singular form of the verb may be treated as
something outstanding in the system of regular inflected verbs in Polish, as it performs
a number of jobs.
Yet another interesting feature of ISCs (as claimed by Rivero, Arregui and
Frąckowiak 2010) consists of the fact that manner modification, either in the form of a
regular manner adverb, or included in the semantics of the lexical verb, must appear in
such structures. Rivero, Arregui and Frąckowiak (2010) link this feature with the
structural property of ISCs (see (9) below). Hence, we have (1) above with the
lexically specified feature of inadvertence (in semelfactive, involuntary action), (2)
with situationally specified circumstances (by accident), and (3) with an overt
adverbial modification. Below we would like to additionally illustrate this requirement
with a revealing pair of examples8 taken from Rivero, Arregui and Frąckowiak (2010:
711):
(6)
(7)
5
*Zapaliło
mi
się
sofę.
lit.up.NEU I.DAT REFL
sofa.ACC
‘I set a sofa on fire by chance.’
Zaprószyło
mi
się
ogień
w łóżku.
Although they may also function as regular 3rd person singular neuter agreement verb-forms,
e.g. Dziecko poszło do lasu ‘The child went.3rdSG NEU PAST into the woods’.
6
See e.g. Laskowski (1984: 146–148).
7
Rivero, Arregui and Frąckowiak (2010) do not consider such structures, as they are not
involuntary states.
8
We have different grammaticality judgments concerning the example in (6) than their authors,
who mark both of them as grammatical, while we find the first of them odd. However, with the
example in (6) being ungrammatical, the point is illustrated even more clearly.
set.on.fire.NEU I.DAT REFL fire.ACC in bed
‘I set a sofa on fire by chance.’
The acceptability judgments of these two sentences are in contrast, as in (6) the verb
does not imply in itself the accidental manner of the action, and thus the action has to
be adverbially specified for our ISC; as it is not, ungrammaticality results. (7) contains
the verb which in itself specifies the accidental manner of the action and thus no
adverbial modification must be placed in the structure for the sentence to be
acceptable and fully grammatical.
Another feature of these ISCs, as discussed in Rivero, Arregui and Frąckowiak
(2010) concerns the lack of control of the dative argument over the event described by
the structure. In the abovementioned examples of ISCs, the situation has occurred due
to external circumstances, and not because of the volition of the argument in the
Dative case. In this light, another feature of ISC structures seems to be quite
unexpected; namely, the dative argument seems unable to be linked to inanimate
forces. This limitation is duly noted by Rivero, Arregui and Frąckowiak (2010: 711)
but left unexplained:9
(8)
*Słońcu się
wzeszło.
sun.DAT REFL
came out.NEU
‘The sun (somehow) came out.’
Consequently, the features to be accounted for in ISCs are: the occurrence of the
dative argument in the absence of the nominative subject, the default verbal form
showing no agreement, the necessity of manner modification, the human/animate
character of the dative argument, which, however, does not exert any control over the
event and, additionally, the presence of the resumptive się in such structures.
4. Rivero, Arregui and Frąckowiak’s (2010) analysis of ICSs in Polish
Rivero, Arregui and Frąckowiak (2010) claim to deal with ICS structures in Polish in
the larger context of ‘out of control’ constructions, but as most of their analysis is
devoted to, and based on, the Polish data, we feel that these data can be re-analysed on
their own against the system of the Polish language to see how convincing their
solutions are in this light.
The pivot of Rivero, Arregui and Frąckowiak’s (2010) analysis lies in the silent
circumstancial modal they introduce, which heads an Applicative Phrase with an
applied argument in the Dative filling the position of the specifier, and a Tense Phrase
complement, which in turn contains the resumptive clitic się. Another obligatory
Notice, however, that in the example in (8) Rivero, Arregui and Frąckowiak (2010) do not
supply any manner adverb. The sentence: Słońcu wzeszło się dziś wcześnie ‘The sun rose today
early’ sounds much better and according to our judgment would be grammatical, if somewhat
poetical. It is true, however, that Polish grammarians claim that such structures imply personal
performer of the action, cf. e.g. Laskowski (1984: 147 ): ‘(…) konstrukcje nieosobowe na się
i m p l i k u j ą i s t n i e n i e osobowego wykonawcy czynności lub nosiciela stanu czy
procesu (…)’ [impersonal constructions with się imply the existence of a person performing
the activity or a bearer of a state or process tr. mine A.M.-K.]. This remark appears in the context of
dativeless structures though.
9
element is the Manner Phrase. Other details will become clearer as we go along.
Below we include the structure (p. 706) for the sentence: Jankowi tańczyło się dobrze
‘Janek. DAT danced.NEU REFL well’.
(9)
ApplP
Jankowi-DAT
Manner Phrase
[[TP]] = λ10 x. λ e. λw. (danced
(e)(w) & Agent (x,e,w))
TP dobrze λ x. λ e.λw.(
VoiceP
CM
good(x)(e)(w))
i
sięi
VP
tańczyło . λ e. λw. (dance )(e)(w))11
The presence of the Applicative Phrase accounts for the introduction of the dative
argument with a loosely specified semantic function, as it is a high applicative and
such variation is precisely what Pylkkänen (2008) predicts for high applicatives. The
differences in the function of the dative arguments in (1), (2) and (3) above, which we
have discussed in Section 3, tally with such a structure. The fact that the phrase is
headed by a modal accounts for the not-quite finite nature of the lexical verb, i.e. the
fact that it is in the third person singular neuter, irrespective of the context. The
presence of the manner phrase accounts for the necessity of manner modification in
such structures, and also for the lack of control of the human element over the action
as the manner is otherwise regulated. The requirement of the human interpretation for
the dative argument is taken from Chierchia (1995) and especially Rivero and
Sheppard (2003), where się is viewed as a variable, whose essential feature is human
presupposition. As the reflexive pronoun, the external argument of the active voice
(represented in the structure as i) and the applied argument are coindexed, the human
factor is to be expected. The modal is human-dependent (because of the personal
dative and the personal resumptive się). As a result, ISCs cannot appear e.g. with
unaccusatives:
(10)
10
*Żelazu
topiło
się
łatwo
Exact semantic representations cannot be introduced within the limits of this paper in any
great detail. We will discuss the ones that are immediately necessary. For more information
refer to Heim and Kratzer (1998: 34–39). To put it very crudely, lambda expressions stand for
functions with arguments specified as variables (e.g. x, y, z) and values specified for these
variables.
11
Rivero, Arregui and Frąckowiak (2010: 705) sum up the structure in the following way:
‘(…) we find a meaning constructed with resources outside the inflectional system and verbal
paradigm, namely, with a dative in a new type of high applicative with modal properties that
stands above TP and thus dominates the inflectional space of the clause.’
iron
melted.NEU REFL easily
The modal has some more features, though they are only very briefly mentioned in the
paper, while their more in-depth description may be found in Rivero (2009).12 The
modal has universal force, as in must, it is a circumstantial modal, i.e. it is based on
contextually identified facts, it is manner oriented as one of its arguments is the
Manner Phrase, which, according to Rivero, Arregui and Frąckowiak (2010) means
that the manner of the action has to be specified in ISCs either lexically, contextually
or through a manner adverb:
(11)
Marcie
pisało
się
dobrze.
Marta.DAT
wrote.NEU REFL well
‘Marta (by chance) wrote well.’
In (11) manner is specified by the adverb, in (1) above sneeze implies involuntary
manner, in (2) the context prompts that something happened by accident. If no such
manner adverb is suggested, ungrammaticality results:
(12)
*Tańczyło
się
im
danced.NEU REFL them.DAT
Moreover, the structure in (9) implies that the dative argument has no control over the
manner of the action13 and that the manner refers to the perception of the event by the
applied argument and not to the event: Marcie pisało się dobrze (see (11) above) does
not mean that she wrote good stuff, cf. Marta pisała dobrze ‘Marta.NOM wrote well’.
The analysis presented is concise, links the structure with the semantic properties
very well, and describes the necessary data, explaining some phenomena that had
evaded explication up to now, like the necessity of having the manner adverbial with
such constructions, which was duly noted (see Rivero and Sheppard 2003), but not
interpreted. Although we admire the elegance of the solution, we feel that some of its
claims are not justified enough, especially if considered in the overall context of the
Polish language. Rivero, Arregui and Frąckowiak (2010) take out this small portion of
the data without heeding the broader context of the language structure.
5. Problems with Rivero, Arregui and Frąckowiak’s (2010) analysis
When considered in detail, Rivero, Arregui and Frąckowiak’s (2010) analysis presents
many problems. First of all the notion of the circumstantial modal (CM), the pivot
holding up the whole analysis, is an ad hoc element in the Polish system. For one
thing it has no overt realisation and its presence is exclusively felt due to the influence
that it exerts over the sentence interpretation and structure. It does not even constitute
an affix (as it does in the data with which the authors contrast their analysis for
Polish). Of course, the existence of various empty categories and empty morphemes is
12
Rivero (2009) models her analysis of modal elements on Kratzer (1981, 1991).
Rivero and Sheppard (2003) and Rivero (2009) link the property with the fact that the
argument is in the dative and it is not in TP as such, so consequently, although it mostly plays
the part of a logical subject, some of its properties, for instance control, are suspended.
13
widely recognised in the literature,14 but such entities burden the linguist with a strong
obligation to be extra careful and compile abundant argumentation supporting the
existence of the said category. Polish does not show strong arguments for claiming
that TPs of the type specified in (9) really possess a modal dominating the TP.
5.1. Arguments against an empty modal in ISCs in Polish
In this subsection we will present some reasons why the existence of the modal
element in Polish is doubtful.
5.1.1.Circumstantial and non-circumstantial readings of ISCs
First of all, we would like to draw the reader’s attention to the meaning of the phrases
resembling ISCs, but just without the applied argument. Such phrases could be
expected to possess the same structure as in (9) above, minus the applied argument,
but with the modal over the TP (together with its manner modifier). Such sentences,
though, as (13) below shows, do not necessarily have the modal meaning attributed to
the phrase in (9):
(13)
Tańczyło
się
dobrze
danced.NEU REFL well
The sentence in (13), unlike the one in (9), is ambiguous between two readings –
one with the meaning characteristic of the presence of the circumstancial modal: the
dancing was good because of independent reasons – and another, non-modal reading.
The second reading allows human control over the now implicit argument: the quality
of the action in the TP depends on the human element implied in the structure (with
the help of the resumptive się). This meaning is at least equally viable as the
circumstancial one:
(14)
Tańczyło
się
dobrze, bo długo
trenowaliśmy.
danced.NEU REFL well, as long
practiced.1stPL Past
‘We danced well as we had been practising a long time.’
(14) is an equivalent of (15) below:
(15)
Tańczyliśmy
dobrze, bo długo
trenowaliśmy.
dance1stPL PAST. well, as long
practised.1stPL PAST
‘We danced well as we had been practising a long time.’
Consequently, as the presence of the modal in Rivero, Arregui and Frąckowiak’s
(2010) model15 is essential for suspending the logical subject’s control over the
14
See e.g. Landau (2010) for a recent and convincing proposal, with an extensive inventory of
such categories.
15
Rivero, Arregui and Frąckowiak (2010: 709) write: ‘(…) the ISC in [Jankowi tańczyło się
dobrze] is true in a world iff the worlds that satisfy the modal base (i.e. those matching the
circumstances, then, in the light of the interpretation in (14), the modal’s presence in
(13) is at least spurious; consequently, its place in (9) also becomes doubtful.
5.1.2. True modal ISCs in Slovenian
The presence of the modal element as such in these structures has been contended for
other reasons in Rivero and Sheppard (2003: 97). They supply two structures for ISCs,
one for Polish and one for Slovenian, and then their modal force is examined and
compared. They find out that the modal meaning exists in Slovenian, but not in Polish:
(16)
Tę książkę
czytało
mi
this book. ACC
read.NEU I.DAT
‘I read this book with pleasure.’
się
z przyjemnością.
REFL with pleasure
(Pol)
vs.
(17)
Danes
dopoldne
se
mi
je
jedlo
jagode.
today
morning
REFL I.DAT be.3S eat.NEU strawberries.ACC
‘This morning I felt like eating strawberries.’
(Slo)
This interpretation runs as follows (Rivero and Sheppard 2003: 97): ‘[16] denotes a
past eventuality with the Dat as (involuntary) Agent. [17] is a modalized statement,
not a past eventuality, and the Dat resembles an (involuntary) Experiencer. Thus, the
speaker who truthfully utters the Pol sentence must have read a book, while the
speaker who utters the Slo sentence need not have eaten strawberries.’ If we
understand it correctly, the modality is relevant to the latter interpretation, and nonexistent for Polish ISCs. And again, a similar thought is repeated later (Rivero and
Sheppard 2003: 137), with respect to other data, which shows that Polish needs an
overt modal to express a modal idea: ‘Pol [18] and Slo [19] each expresses the idea
that John is sleepy, but the Pol version must be equipped with an overt modal and the
Slo version need not be (…)
(18)
Jankowi
John.DAT
chce
want.3S
(19)
Janezu
John.DAT
se
spi
REFL sleep.3S’
się
spać
REFL sleep.INF
(Pol)
(Slo)
As we see from the above examples, in earlier versions of the same theory the very
same data is denied the modal overtone, which is played up in the current version. We
believe that this might undermine the soundness of the modal analysis of such
structures as well.
actual world with respect to relevant circumstances), including the presupposed event of Janek
dancing, are also worlds in which the event was pleasurable for Janek.’
5.1.3. ISCs in Polish do not share the formal features of other Polish modal-like
structures
The examples above prompt one more problem with proposing the modal element in
Polish ISCs. As we have seen in (18) above, in Polish the usual verbal form after a
modal-like operator is the infinitive, and not the 3rd pers. sg. neut. In this group of
operators we may include (see e.g. Grochowski 1984: 236–237) uninflected verbs
like: można ‘can’, trzeba ‘must’, wolno ‘may’, and voluntative verbs such as: chcieć
‘want’, pragnąć ‘desire’, da się ‘it is possible’. In each of these cases it is the
infinitival verbal form which follows the element with modal meaning. If these
uninflected verbs and voluntative verbs are indeed elements semantically close to the
proposed CM,16 then we may expect that their distribution would, at least in some
cases, partially resemble that of CMs. Such a parallelism does not exist, as the
examples in (20) below show:
(20)
a. Można dobrze tańczyć.
can
well dance.INF
‘One/people can dance well.’
b.
Da się to zjeść.
can it eat.INF
‘One/people can eat it.’
It has been pointed out to us17 that the form by (the conditional [irrealis] forming
particle),18 which is the closest to an overt modal that Polish has, can appear with 3rd
pers. sg. neut. verbal forms:
(21)
Tej muzyki
by
się
this music.GEN IRREALIS
REFL
‘This music could be listened to’.
słuchało.
listen to.3rd SG NEU PAST
However, here the appearance of the 3rd person default verb is very limited as the
lexical verb has to appear in the past form, so its distribution is restricted, unlike in
ISC constructions, which appear in all tenses. Compare the examples below:
(22)
Tej muzyki *by
się
słucha
this music.GEN IRREALIS REFL słucha 3rd SG NEU PRESENT
vs.
16
CM stands for circumstantial modal.
Prof. Anna Bondaruk [personal communication] has supplied us with another example of 3 rd
pers. sg. neut. used with by: Aby żyło się lepiej ‘Let there be a better life for us’, which is the
equivalent of a subjunctive expression in English, and to which the following limitations also
apply. These phenomena certainly await some additional investigations.
18
See Zwicky (1985), Spencer (1991), Chung and Timberlake (1985).
17
(23)
Tej muzyki
nam
się
słucha
dobrze.
this music.ACC we.DAT REFL listen to.3rd SG NEU PRESENT well
‘We can listen to this music with pleasure.’
If, however, we have the structure with both: the modal semantic predicate and the
irrealis particle ((24) below), the lexical verb appears in the infinitive:
(24)
Można
by
słuchać
muzyki.
can
IRREALIS listen to.INF music.ACC
‘This music can be listened to.’
Consequently, it does not have to be the modal element by that requires the
appearance of the neuter default form in (21) above.
Of course, the facts that ISCs in Polish may not necessarily convey the modal
meaning, have unprecedented phonologically empty modal morphemes in Polish, and
appear with a type of TP not really to be expected, do not, each taken in isolation,
constitute strong evidence against Rivero, Arregui and Frąckowiak’s (2010) analysis,
but taken all together, they may set us thinking.
5.1.4. Manner modification is not modal-dependent
In this subsection we will show why the complex of the Applicative Phrase headed by
a modal with a Manner Phrase argument is not very convincing or indispensable. If
structures like Jankowi tańczyło się dobrze (see (9) above) contain both the applicative
and the modal element, then we may assume that sentences without the applied
argument, but otherwise identical, have the modal in their structure too, especially as
some of the allegedly modal properties19 obtain for these sentences as well, e.g. human
control, lack of these structures with inchoative verbs, etc.20 Yet, contrary to our
expectations, applicative-less structures do not require adverbial modification:
(25)
Tańczyło się. ‘Somebody danced.’
(26)
Tańczyło się dobrze. ‘The dancing was good.’
(27)
Tańczyło się do rana. ‘The dancing went on until morning.’
Unlike ISCs, the examples above show no sensitivity to adverbial modification, even
though other properties attributed to the modal presence are preserved. Thus, we feel
that, whatever causes the limitations described in Section 5.1.3, it certainly is not the
CM.
5.2. ISCs in Polish are not human dependent
19
Of course, the problems with such assumptions discussed in connection with (13) and (14)
above and Section 5.2 below will be relevant to these examples as well.
20
*Topniało się dobrze ‘Something melted well’ is as ungrammatical as *Topniało się dobrze
metalowi ‘The metal melted well’ with an applied argument.
The speculative nature of the presence of a modal element in the structure of Polish
ISCs is not the only problem of Rivero, Arregui and Frąckowiak’s (2010) analysis;
some of the properties that the authors attribute to the modal are (p.705) ‘hardwired’
into the whole structure of ISCs and therefore, if contended, make the whole
derivation less convincing.
CMs are said to possess a human element in their interpretation.21 However, its
presence is also doubtful. Consider a similar structure illustrated by (28) and (29)
below. The structure possesses a lexical verb in a form identical to that in ISCs, and a
dative argument signaling the Applicative Phrase, so it is possible that this structure
shares some elements with ISCs.22
(28)
Złamało
mu
nogę.
broke.NEU he.DAT leg.ACC
‘Something broke his leg.’
(29)
Urwało
mu
rękę.
tore off.NEU he.DAT arm.ACC
‘Something tore off his arm.’
If the element deciding about the impersonal reading of the structures in (28) and (29)
is the same as in ISCs – a modal element over the TP then it could be the very same
modal as in ISCs (as the unnecessary multiplication of empty categories is quite
costly). If so, then we could expect that the structure would have a human Agent in its
reading, as the CM is pervaded by human characteristics. This is not the case. Totally
the opposite, the Causer here is implied as some inanimate, non-human force. For
instance, in the case of (28) the force could be a train, or a saw, but not a giant.
The constructions such as the ones above can be waived as they may not share the
sensitive part of the structure with ISCs after all. Still, the supposedly human nature of
CMs remains doubtful within the area of ISC constructions proper, where we find
utterances like in (30):
(30)
Słońcu
wzeszło się
dziś wcześnie.
sun.DAT rose.NEU PAST today early
‘The sun rose early today.’
They are grammatical, although slightly poetical. One may see in this example an
anthropomorphic approach to the forces of nature, but, even so, such examples would
suggest that the human reading of CMs is not structure dependent as Rivero, Arregui
and Frąckowiak (2010) claim, but that it results from some pragmatic, easily
overridden (weaker) constraints.
Rivero, Arregui and Frąckowiak (2010: 705) claim that ‘(…) the ISC modal must be human
dependent/personal, a requirement that we derive from its syntax. The ISC modal heads an
Applicative Phrase with a dative specifier and a clausal complement: a Tense Phrase (TP). The
TP contains a reflexive human pronoun resuming the dative: the so-called impersonal się.
ISCs, then, display sensitivity to the subject based in dative and reflexive marking hardwired
into the interpretation of the modal, which must be personal’.
22
As we have shown in section 5.1.1, the modal meaning is not necessary with Rivero, Arregui
and Frąckowiak’s (2010) CMs.
21
Even better, there are cases of non-human readings that cannot be reduced to the
metaphorical treatment of some arguments. Consider the examples below:
(31)
Przykszy
mi
się
strasznie.
pine (after). NEU PRESENT I.DAT REFL awfully
‘I pine after something awfully.’
(32)
Nudzi
mi
się
okrutnie.
bore. NEU PRESENT I.DAT REFL awfully
‘I am bored to death.’
(33)
Dłuży
mi
się
niewiarygodnie.
tarry.NEU
I.DAT REFL unbelievably
‘I am unbelievably bored.’
The examples in (31), (32) and (33) again suggest the existence of external nonpersonal circumstances exerting an influence on the personal Theme in the Dative:
there is nothing personal about the modal element, if indeed such exists.
6. An alternative analysis of ISCs
Is the modal element really necessary in ISCs, is it unique to such structures, or can
ISCs’ properties be explained in some other way? Such questions need to be asked and
answered at this point. One of the facts that the CM purports to explain is the presence
of manner modification in ISCs. Rivero, Arregui and Frąckowiak (2010) suggest that
in the ISC structure the Manner Phrase is introduced by the modal as its argument.
Consequently, it is an argument introduced higher than in a TP and thus it may appear
in ISCs, even if a particular manner modifier is ungrammatical when it directly
accompanies the lexical verb inside the TP. This high structural position accounts very
well for the contrast in grammaticality between the utterances in (34) and (35) below
(Rivero, Arregui and Frąckowiak (2010: 708):23
(34)
Basia mieszka u siostry ‘Barbara lives at her sister’s’
(35)
Basia*dobrze mieszka u siostry ‘Barbara *well lives at her sister’s’
(36)
Basi
Barbara.DAT
dobrze się
mieszka
well REFL live.NEU PRESENT
u siostry.
at sister.GEN
Note, however, that Rivero, Arregui and Frąckowiak (2010: 708) support their analysis by
giving an example of a structure with two adverbial elements, one allegedly high in structure,
in the modal-dependent position, the other low, in the TP: Dobrze Jankowi tańczyło się fatalnie
‘It felt good to John that he danced awfully’. The sentence is outright ungrammatical in
Polish though, so it cannot support their analysis. It does not disprove it either though, as there
may be some other limitations involved rendering it ungrammatical than the lack of adverbial
modification higher than in the TP. We believe that the ungrammaticality of *Dobrze Jankowi
tańczyło się fatalnie is connected with the fact that both layers of the structure are human
oriented in the sense of Rivero, Arregui and Frąckowiak (2010), and that it is the same human
in both cases, so a logical clash results in the interpretation.
23
‘Barbara lives well at her sister’s.’
Again, we are not sure that such sentences argue in favour of their structure if we
consider the system of the Polish language; the same effect can be noted in other
sentences with applied arguments introduced by applicative heads as in (37) below,
but these sentences give us absolutely no grounds for suspecting the presence of any
modal element in them:24
(37)
Basia
dobrze
sobie
mieszka
u siostry.
Barbara well
applied argument.DAT live.3rd SG PRESENT at sister GEN
‘Barbara lives well at her sister’s.’
The sentence above contains an applicative construction with the dative argument
sobie coindexed with the subject of the sentence. This points to the presence of an
applicative head in the structure of (37), like in Pylkkänen (2008), or at least to some
portion of the structure introducing such a dative (applied) argument. This, in turn,
proves that the presence of the manner modification over the TP is not conditioned by
any CM (even if we believe that there are CMs in ISCs), but by the presence of the
applicative portion of the structure, whatever the structural details.
Accidentally, there is much more to be discovered about the link between the
applicative phrase and the manner modification25 and we feel that it is rather the
control properties that have a role to play in what is going on in the structures with the
applied argument. Note in the examples (38) – (44) below that the applicatives in ISCs
and sobie applicatives accept adverbial modifies differently, depending on the
applicative type and the lexical verb:
(38)
Mieszkam sobie dobrze u siostry. ‘I live well at my sister’s.’ (sobie applicative)
and
(39)
Mieszka mi się dobrze u siostry. ‘I live well at my sister’s.’ (ISC applicative)
As (38) and (39) above show, both applicative structures are grammatical with
dobrze as a modifying element. The situation gets complicated, though, if we take an
action verb, like in the examples below:
(40)
*Tańczyłam sobie dobrze. ‘I danced well.’ (sobie applicative)
(41)
Tańczyłam sobie do rana. ‘I danced until morning.’ (sobie applicative)
vs.
(42)
Tańczyło mi się dobrze. ‘I danced well.’
(43)
*Tańczyło mi się do rana. ‘I danced until morning.’ (ISC applicative)
24
25
(ISC applicative)
For a recent analysis of such applicatives see Malicka-Kleparska (to appear).
In contrast to the doubtful relationship of a CM and a manner phrase.
(44)
Tańczyło mi się dobrze do rana. ‘I danced well until morning.’(ISC applicative)
(44) above reveals that the ungrammaticality of (43) is due to the fact that do rana
‘until morning’ does not count as a manner modification; as soon as this element is
added, the sentence gains grammaticality. However, the ungrammaticality of (40)
remains unaccounted for; it cannot be due to the fact that such structures accept no
broadly understood adverbial modification (cf. (38)). Note, however, that the types of
verbs we have in (38) and (40) differ significantly. The one in (38) contains what may
be believed to be an unaccusative26 verb, while the one in (40) an unergative. If, in the
structure of (38), in its deep configuration, we have no external argument, then dobrze
must be controlled by some other element in the structure – it refers to the event itself.
On the other hand, (40) contains an unergative lexeme with the external argument
introduced by the voice head.
Let us imagine that one of the lexical properties of dobrze27 is that it has to have
scope over the whole event with its all participants, while do rana modifies only the
lexical verb with its internal argument/arguments. Thus, in Tańczył dobrze ‘He danced
well’ dobrze scopes over the whole sentence; in Tańczyło mi się dobrze (42) the
applicative argument, especially if we dispense with the modal, could be directly
introduced by the applicative head and dobrze has the scope over the whole event as
well:
(45)
Appl P
mi
Appl.head
Manner Phrase (dobrze)
TP
i
Voice P
sięi
VP
tańczyło
26
The distinction between unaccusative and unergative verbs is very well motivated since the
times of Perlmutter’s (1978) Unaccusative Hypothesis. For the purposes of this study we adopt
the understanding of unaccusative and unergative terms taken from Levin and Rappaport
Hovav (1995: 3) as D-structure configurations: Unergative verb: NP[VPV], Unaccusative
verb___[vpV NP/CP].
27
Rivero, Arregui and Frąckowiak (2010: 708) allow for the possibility that ‘(…) there may be
more than one manner in ISCs. (…) dobrze ‘well’ serves as the argument of CM, while fatalnie
‘terribly’ operates within the TP and describes the dancing.’ We would like to claim that do
rana, although it is not manner modification, operates within the TP.
On the other hand, *Tańczyłam sobie dobrze may have the following structure:28
(46)
Voice P
I
Voice
sobie
Appl. head
TP
Manner Phrase
(dobrze)
tańczyłam
Note that, in such a case dobrze does not scope over the whole event as the external
argument is too high up in the structure, divided from the TP by the applied argument
– an optional participant in the simple active voice structure of the event.29 We
suggested before that dobrze has to scope over the whole event; since in (40), and (46)
it fails to do that, ungrammaticality results.
This analysis also explains why Mieszkałam sobie dobrze u siostry ‘I lived well at
my sister’s’ is grammatical; the surface external argument in this structure originates
as the internal argument of the unaccusative verb, so dobrze may then scope over the
whole event, before the internal argument is externalised.
These remarks must be treated as a loose introduction, and by no means a final
solution to the problem, but we feel it is the right track to follow.30 On the whole, we
feel that the area of the interaction of applicatives, ISCs and adverbial elements awaits
further extensive work.
7. Conclusion
In this text we have considered the interface of semantic interpretations, syntactic
structures as revealed by co-occurrence limitations and lexical representations. The
material consists of Involuntary-state constructions and related applicatives in Polish.
We have analysed these together with their adverbial modifications, which vary with
28
The general idea of the applicative structure with an abstract applicative head is taken from
Pylkkänen (2008); the modifications result from our considerations concerning ISCs and the
related structures.
29
As predicted *Tańczyłam im dobrze ‘I danced well for them’ does not sound any better.
30
The presence of similar problems has been signalled in Rivero and Sheppard (2003), but no
solution was offered.
respect to the lexical verb present in the structure. The difference between
unaccusative and unergative verbs has been found to be significant for the analysed
structures, as well as for the lexical properties of the adverbs like dobrze ‘well’.
We found a current analysis of ISCs, which proposes the structure with a
circumstantial modal, to be unsatisfactory as it crashes when confronted with Polish
material from related structures. Instead, we have presented an alternative account
where interesting facts about ISCs and other similar constructions result from the
applicative module present in strategic places of the relevant syntactic structures.
References
Bułat, E. 2004. Reflexive verbs as null object licensers in Polish. Similarities between
the reflexive się and small pro. Poznań Studies in Contrastive Linguistics 39:
29–38.
Chierchia, G. 1995. The variability of impersonal subjects. In E. Bach, E. Jelinek, A.
Kratzer, and B. Hall Partee (eds.), Quantification in natural language, 107–
143. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Chung S., and A. Timberlake. 1985. Tense, aspect, and mood. In T. Shopen (ed.),
Language typology and syntactic description. Volume III. Grammatical
categories and the lexicon, 202–258. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Comrie, B. 1985. Causative verb formation and other verb-deriving morphology. In T.
Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description. Volume III.
Grammatical categories and the lexicon, 309–348. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Grochowski, M. 1984. Składnia wyrażeń predykatywnych [Syntax of predicative
expressions]. In Z. Topolińska (ed.), Gramatyka współczesnego języka
polskiego. Składnia [Grammar of Modern Polish. Syntax], 213–299.
Warszawa: PWN.
Heim, I., and A. Kratzer. 1998. Semantics in Generative Grammar. Malden, Mass:
Blackwell Publishers Inc.
Dixon, R. M. W., and A. Y. Aikenvald. 2000. Changing valency. Case studies in
transitivity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kardela, H. 1985. A grammar of English and Polish reflexives. Lublin: Uniwersytet
Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej.
Kratzer, A. 1996. Severing the external argument from its verb. In J. Rooryck, and L.
Zarig (eds.), Phrase structure and the lexicon, 109–137. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Kratzer, A. 1991. Modality. In A. von Stechow, and D. Wunderlich (eds.), Semantics:
An international handbook of contemporary research, 639–650. New York:
Walter de Gruyter.
Kratzer, A. 1981. The notional category of modality. In H.-J. Niekmayer, and H.
Rieser (eds.), Words, worlds, and contexts, 38–74. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Landau, I. 2010. The explicit syntax of implicit arguments. Linguistic Inquiry 41(3):
357–388.
Laskowski, R. 1984. Kategorie morfologiczne języka polskiego – charakterystyka
funkcjonalna [Morphological categories of the Polish language – functional
characteristics]. In R. Grzegorczykowa, R. Laskowski, and H. Wróbel (eds.),
Morfologia [Morphology], 121–163. Warszawa: PWN.
Levin, B., and M. Rappaport Hovav. 1995. Unaccusativity. At the syntax-lexical
semantics interface. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Malicka-Kleparska, A. to appear. High applicatives in Polish. In E. Cyran, H. Kardela,
and B. Szymanek (eds.), Volume in Memory of Ed Gussmann, .
Marantz, A. 1984. On the nature of grammatical relations. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT
Press.
Pylkkänen, L. 2008. Introducing arguments. Linguistic Inquiry Monograph 48.
Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Perlmutter, D. 1978. Impersonal passives and the unaccusative hypothesis. In
Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society,
157–189. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistic Society, University of California.
Rivero, M. L. 2009. Intensionality, high applicatives, and aspect: involuntary state
constructions in Bulgarian and Slovenian. Natural Language and Linguistic
Theory 27: 151–196.
Rivero M. L., A. Arregui, and E. Frąckowiak. 2010. Variation in circumstantial
modality: Polish versus St’át’imcets. Linguistic Inquiry 41(4): 704–714.
Rivero, M. L., and M. Milojević Sheppard. 2003. Indefinite reflexive clitics in Slavic:
Polish and Slovenian. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21: 89–155.
Spencer, A. 1991. Morphological theory. An introduction to word structure in
Generative Grammar. Cambridge, Mass.: Basil Blackwell Inc.
Szober,
S.
1962.
Gramatyka
języka
polskiego
[A
grammar
of
the Polish language]. Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
Szymanek, B. 2010. A panorama of Polish word-formation. Lublin: Wydawnictwo
KUL.
Wróbel, H. 1984. Słowotwórstwo czasowników [Word-formation of verbs]. In R.
Grzegorczykowa, R. Laskowski, and H. Wróbel (eds.), Morfologia
[Morphology], 467–511. Warszawa: PWN.
Zwicky, A. 1985. Clitics and particles. Language 61: 283–305.