Hi, another excercise I am working on. By the way... do you think that these are too difficult to be part of this forum. I just recogniced that no one answered my last ones. Maybe I should stop spamming your forum with questions like that. I just hoped that someone is interested in linguistics and wants to chat with me about these questions. They are sometimes very hard to understand and it might be easier to solve them together. Any ideas for solutions to these sentences...... just let me know

3)      Discuss the argument structure in the following sets of sentences:

Short explanation to my answers:

The important verb is written in bold letters, the selected arguments are underlined.

(i) –> co-indexation

a)      I told John that he should buy the bicycle.

“told” selects “I”, John and “that he should buy the bicycle”

“should buy” selects “he” and “the bicycle”

I told John to buy the bicycle.

Nearly the same applies to “told” as in the sentence above.

A different situation is with the verb “to buy”. “The bicycle is still internal argument, but now the external argument is an empty category.

I told John(i) ec(i) to buy the bicycle.

This empty category ec is controlled by John, it is a non-overt argument.

b)     I expect that John will return.

“Expect” takes “I” and “that John will return” as arguments.

“will return” takes “John” as external agentive argument

I expect John to return.

Here, “expect” takes “I” as external agentive argument, “John” internal one and “to return” “to return” takes an empty category as its argument that is controlled by John

I expect John(i) ec(i) to return

c)      I want my coffee to be piping hot.

“Want” takes “I” (agent), “my coffee” and “to be pipng hot”

Again, an empty category occurs here – “to be” selects as arguments the empty category controlled by “my coffee” and “piping hot” as theme.

I want my coffee(i) ec(i) to be piping hot.

I want my coffee piping hot.

This one is a case that is quite unclear to me. I decided that “want” takes “I” and “my coffee piping hot” as theme. Furthermore I believe that “piping hot” is an example for being an argument of a NP. “Piping hot” therefore is an argument of my coffee, as in:

Rembrandt´s picture of Sakia

            1                             2

d)     I consider that it is rather surprising that Mary has left.

“consider” – external: “I” ,internal: “that it is rather surprising” and “that Mary has left”

      “is” – internal: “it”, external: “rather surprising” and “that Mary has left.

      I am not sure about “it” here. I think it is an example for an expletive it that is

in construction with the clause. “It”, as far as I understood the book, cannot

be questioned and is therefore not referential.

“has left” – external: “Mary”

I consider it to be rather surprising that Mary has left.

“consider” external: “I” , internal: “to be rather surprising” and “that Mary has left” à maybe the inernal one is one argument, but somehow I feel that these must be two arguments.

“has left”  external: “Mary”

I consider it rather surprising that Mary has left.

“consider” selects “I” as external argument and the whole phrase

“it rather surprising that Mary has left” as its internal argument.