Beth Levin

The English dative alternation: The case for verb sensitivity

We challenge the predominant view of the English dative alternation, which takes all alternating verbs to have two meanings: a caused possession meaning realized by the double object variant and a caused motion meaning realized by the to variant. Instead, we argue that verbs like give and sell only have a caused possession meaning, while verbs like throw and send have both caused motion and caused possession meanings. We show that the caused possession meaning may be realized by both variants. Concomitantly, we argue that verbs like give , even in the to variant, lack a conceptual path constituent, and instead have a caused possession meaning which can be understood as the bringing about of a ‘have’ relation. We reassess evidence for alternative approaches adduced from inference patterns and verb–argument combinations and demonstrate how our verb-sensitive analysis, when combined with an account of variant choice, provides a more insightful explanation of this data, while having wider coverage. Our investigation affirms proposals that a verbs own meaning plays a key role in determining its argument realization options. To conclude, we consider the crosslinguistic implications of our study, attempting to explain why so many languages lack a true dative alternation.

Exploiting lexical regularities in designing natural language systems

This paper presents the lexical component of the START Question Answering system developed at the MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. START is able to interpret correctly a wide range of semantic relationships associated with a alternate expressions of the arguments of verbs. The design of the system takes advantage of the results of recent linguistic research into the structure of the lexicon, allowing START to attain a broader range of coverage than many existing systems while maintaining modular organization.

Wiping the Slate clean : A lexical semantic exploration

This paper presents a case study in lexical semantic analysis aimed at uncovering syntactically relevant components of verb meaning. Our strategy is to investigate the nature of the lexical knowledge that a speaker of English possesses with respect to certain apparently semantically related verbs: a set of verbs that might as a first approximation be classed as verbs of removal. However, a closer examination of these apparently semantically related verbs reveals that their syntactic properties diverge. An exploration of the patterns of behavior of the verbs suggests that the initial class includes three linguistically significant subclasses. The components of meaning that are relevant to characterizing each subclass are identified by isolating those components of meaning that the members of each subclass share. The conclusion considers the implications of the meaning components identified in this study for a lexical semantic representation.

The typology of motion expressions revisited

This paper provides a new perspective on the options available to languages for encoding directed motion events. Talmy (2000) introduces an influential two-way typology, proposing that languages adopt either verb- or satellite-framed encoding of motion events. This typology is augmented by Slobin (2004b) and Zlatev & Yangklang (2004) with a third class of equipollently-framed languages. We propose that the observed options can instead be attributed to: (i) the motion-independent morphological, lexical, and syntactic resources languages make available for encoding manner and path of motion, (ii) the role of the verb as the single clause-obligatory lexical category that can encode either manner or path, and (iii) extra-grammatical factors that yield preferences for certain options. Our approach accommodates the growing recognition that most languages straddle more than one of the previously proposed typological categories: a language may show both verb- and satelliteframed patterns, or if it allows equipollent-framing, even all three patterns. We further show that even purported verb-framed languages may not only allow but actually prefer satellite-framed patterns when appropriate contextual support is available, a situation unexpected if a two- or three-way typology is assumed. Finally, we explain the appeal of previously proposed two- and three-way typologies: they capture the encoding options predicted to be preferred once certain external factors are recognized, including complexity of expression and biases in lexical inventories.

A preliminary analysis of causative verbs in English

Abstract This paper investigates the phenomena that come under the label ‘causative alternation’ in English, as illustrated in the transitive and intransitive sentence pair Antonia broke the vase / The vase broke . Central to our analysis is a distinction between verbs which are inherently monadic and verbs which are inherently dyadic. Given this distinction, much of the relevant data is explained by distinguishing two processes that give rise to causative alternation verbs. The first, and by far more pervasive process, forms lexical detransitive verbs from certain transitive verbs with a causative meaning. The second process, which is more restricted in its scope, results in the existence of causative transitive verbs related to some intransitive verbs. Finally, this study provides further insight into the semantic underpinnings of the Unaccusativity Hypothesis (Perlmutter 1978).

Lexicalized Meaning and Manner/Result Complementarity

We investigate the English verbs climb and cut, cited as counterexamples to manner/result complementarity: the proposal that verbs lexicalize either manner or result meaning components, but not both. Once their lexicalized meaning is identified and distinguished from contextually determined elements of meaning, cut and climb conform to manner/result complementarity. We show that cut is basically a result verb, with a prototypical manner often inferred. However, as it lexicalizes a result prototypically brought about in a certain manner, some uses simply lexicalize this manner. Crucially, in manner uses, the result component drops out, consistent with manner/result complementarity. In contrast, climb is essentially a manner verb. Once its lexicalized manner is accurately identified and distinguished from meaning contributed by context, the upward direction associated with many uses can be shown to arise from inference. However, climb has some restricted uses which lexicalize a result. Importantly, on these uses, the manner component is lost. With both verbs, then, the manner-only and result-only uses instantiate different, though related, senses of the relevant verb, with each sense conforming to manner/result complementarity.

Levels of Lexical Representation

The lexicon has typically been viewed as a mere list of lexical entries containing idiosyncratic information associated with individual words. Therefore, linguists have paid little attention to the internal structure of lexical entries. More recently, linguists have recognized a need to develop a more structured and elaborated lexical representation. Central to all current theories of the lexicon is a representation of the argument-taking properties of predicators, often referred to as a predicate-argument structure.1 Motivation for the development of theories of predicate-argument representation has come from two sources.

Introduction to special issue of Cognition on lexical and conceptual semantics

It is the fate of those who dwell at the lower employments of life, to be rather driven by the fear of evil, than attracted by the prospect of good; to be exposed to censure, without hope of praise; to be disgraced by miscarriage, or punished for neglect, where success would have been without applause, and diligence without reward. Among these unhappy mortals is the writer of dictionaries ... (Preface, Samuel Johnsons Dictionary, 1755).

Models for Lexical Knowledge Bases

Computational lexicology is evolving around a particular model of lexical acquisition, based on a transition that involves structuring — or at least restructuring — existing on-line lexical resources (dictionaries and corpora) so that they can be used in the creation of a central repository of lexical data (a lexical knowledge base). We discuss some methodological issues related to this process, with respect to currently held assumptions about the nature of lexical information. We argue that current models of lexical knowledge bases are impoverished. Specifically, they are unable to handle certain types of linguistic generalizations which are an essential component of lexical knowledge. We then sketch, in light of a set of functional requirements for a lexical knowledge base, an improved representational model for this kind of knowledge; review some assumptions underlying extracting information from machine-readable dictionaries; and draw conclusions concerning their proper place in the process of lexicon acquisition.

Lexical & conceptual semantics

Parts and boundaries, Ray Jackendoff the syntax of event structure, James Pustejovsky learning to express motion events in English and Korean - the influence of language-specific lexicanization patterns, Soonja Choi and Melissa Bowerman wiping the slate clean - a lexical semantic exploration, Beth Levin and Malka Rappaport Horav affectedness and direct objects - the role of lexical semantics in the acquisition of Vero argument structure, Jean Gropen, Steven Pinker, Michelle Hollander and Richard Goldberg.