Sentence analysis

Share on Facebook

equivocal

#77968 Thu, 03 Mar 05 02:10 AM

In "She wasn't impressed", "She" seems to be the subject. Can you explain "null subject"? Are you talking about theta-roles?

No, i'm not talking about theta-roles. But it would be useful to bring it in at this juncture. The null-subject is an syntactically empty subject. For example in imperatives, the second person pronoun can be omitted:

1. (null) Kill yourself

(null) can be seen as referring to the 2sg pronoun 'you'.

If we talk about theta-roles then, then let's talk a more "normal" passive:

2. The ball was hit by the boy.

"The ball" is the syntactic subject but takes the patient theta-role. "The boy" is the syntactic object but takes the agent theta-role. This is consistent in passives. The same applies for "She wasn't impressed". She is the syntactic subject but the semantic patient, or experiencer if we want to be nitpicky.

However, when I talk of a null subject in "She wasn't impressed" I don't speak of a null syntactic one, I speak of a null semantic one: the agent theta-role is not explicitly assigned to a noun phrase. A null syntactic object then if you will Smile [:)]

Thus the active counterpart would be:

3a. (null) didn't impress her.

Then the passive:

3b. She wasn't impressed by (null).

It appears that if you have a (null) agent theta-role, the stranded preposition can be omitted. Resuling in:

3c. She wasn't impressed.

This actually raises many questions, do verbs such as "impress" predicate for one or two arguments? If one, then active sentences with one argument should work:

4. *She impressed.

If two, then we need to examine the constraints of the null agent in 3b. It appears that this verb can only take null agents in passive constructions but not in active ones. So if the passive is derived from the active, then we need to explain where the agent disappears to. Unless we want to argue that it actually isn't a passive construction. But then we would have to explain 5 & 6:

5. *She was happy by the show.
6. She was impressed by the show.

None of these are easy questions to answer and its certianly worthy as a dissertation topic. We can put our heads to it, given enough time we should figure it out.

equivocal

Joined on Tue, Mar 1 2005

Junior Member (58)

Verbs, Prepositions, Constructions, Nouns, Pronouns, Noun Phrases, Predicates

Casi

#78048 Thu, 03 Mar 05 09:26 AM

Hi Hela,

She looked over the counter. (Phrasal verb; means, inspected)
She looked over the counter. (Prepositional phrase; function: adverb of place)

She looked at me, in my direction. (Prepositional phase; function: adverb of place)
She looked where? (at, in, under, over)

Q: Where did she look?
A: At me.
A: Over the counter.

Q: What did she look over?
A: The document. (Object of the phrasal verb)

Q: Who did she look at?
A: Me (Object of the preposition)

Casi

Joined on Sat, Sep 25 2004

Regular Member (547)

Verbs, Prepositions, Adverbs, Phrasal Verbs

Casi

#78050 Thu, 03 Mar 05 09:41 AM

Eq, nicely done.

Eq wrote:
the agent theta-role is not explicitly assigned to a noun phrase. A null syntactic object then if you willThus the active counterpart would be:

3a. (null) didn't impress her.

Then the passive:

3b. She wasn't impressed by (null).

Agreed. What do you think about the acceptability judgements below?

?Max doesn't impress her.
Max's driving doesn't impress her.

She isn't impressed (?by Max).
She isn't impressed (by Max's driving).

Casi

Nouns, Noun Phrases

Hela

#78431 Fri, 04 Mar 05 06:11 PM

Thanks Casi for your answer,

A/ but in the end what would you say:

1) looked = verb
at me = adverbial of place (looked where?)

2) looked at = verb
me = direct object (looked at whom?)

3) look = verb
at me = "me" object of the preposition "at" ?

Is this 3rd analysis different from the other two ? When do you consider a phrase "object of a preposition" and when do you consider it "direct object"?

B/ Here is another sentence to analyse:

4) There was no sign of the path.

a) no subject here ? What is "there" ?
b) was = copula
c) no sign of the path = subject complement ?
d) could "the path" be considered 'object of the preposition OF' ?

"Gratefully yours," (can I say that ??)
Hela

Hela

Joined on Mon, Nov 15 2004

Tunisia

Regular Member (831)

Verbs, Prepositions, Whom, Direct Objects

equivocal

#78477 Fri, 04 Mar 05 11:07 PM

?Max doesn't impress her.
Max's driving doesn't impress her.

She isn't impressed (?by Max).
She isn't impressed (by Max's driving).

They're all okay by me...

equivocal

Casi

#78521 Sat, 05 Mar 05 02:13 AM

You're welcome, Hela. (L)

1) and 3) are my choices. 3) is a structural analysis of 1).

1) look = verb; at me = adverb; 3) "at" preposition, "me" object of the preposition "at".

She looked at me. (rephrased: She looked in my direction.)

Test:
Where did she look?
At me. (Function: Adverb, Form: Prepositional phrase)

When do you consider a phrase "object of a preposition" and when do you consider it "direct object"?

Well, for me, it's a matter of meaning. If the prep is part of the meaning of the verb, then the (pro)noun that follows functions as a direct object. And if the prep is not part of the verb's meaning, then it functions on its own, and takes its own object:

look over the document (phrasal verb;to inspect)
look over the document (prepositional phrase; direction)

If you insert a word between the verb and the prep, and the result sounds OK, then you don't have a phrasal verb:

Inserting "over":
She looked over at me. (Prepositional phrase;Direction)
She looked over at the document. (Prepositonal Phrase; Direction)

Inserting "at":
*She looked over at the document. (Phrasal verb; Inspected)

Casi