ARGUMENT LINKING IN DERIVED NOMINALS 379Another result-related distinction, first noted by Van Valin (personal
communication), will be made in the RRG analysis: result vs. accumulated
action [AC-ACT]. In this context, result nominals name a new creation —
e.g. invention(s) in The invention(s) was (were) put on display (cf. Levi's
patient nominalizations) or designs in The designs of Sara King are featured
in the July issue of FASHION (cf. Levi's product nominalizations). In con
trast, AC-ACT nominals name the sum total of a verb activity — e.g.
attack(s) in The attack(s) was (were) unexpected. In some cases, accumu
lated action nominals may be interpreted as having an end point such that
something new, equivalent to the sum total of the activity, comes into
being, and the activity as a whole may be treated a performance-object
result nominal.^6 For example, analysis is treated as a performance object in
The analysis(es) is (are) included in the May issue of SCIENCE.
Another set of nominals which need to be distinguished from both
result nominals and process nominals are experiential-state nominals, dis
cussed in 2.3.4.2. These vNs are either nominalized stative verbs — e.g.
love, enjoyment, hatred, reverence — or are nominalizations of the state
brought about by a (particular type of) verb — e.g. amusement, interest,
fright, thrill. What is important to note in a discussion of process-vs.-result
nominals is that while experiential- state nominals do not name processes
(they name states), they have result-like counterparts similar to the result
counterparts of many process nominals. For example, Webster's New Dic
tionary of Synonyms [WNDS] distinguishes between what would be iden
tified here as the experiential-state sense of hatred in a healthy hatred of
scoundrels (cited from Carlyle), and what it refers to as "the concrete use"
of hatred in a family famous for its hatreds (cited from Disraeli). Other
examples of this distinction include Sara's amusement at the clown's antics
vs. The amusements of Sara are many, or Sam's interest in math vs. Sam has
many interests.
Finally, if obviously, the term "result nominal" does not apply to "reg
ular nouns" which have undergone the semantic drift noted by Lebeaux in
regard to establishment in The establishment is weighty, but not all powerful
(1986: 233), or as has occurred in the cases of receipt as "bill of sale" and
design as "attribute of NP" (e.g. The design of the building is unique).
Where the process vs. result status of nominals is not immediately
apparent, three of numerous tests noted by Grimshaw (1986: 15, 18) may
be appealed to.