ARGUMENT LINKING IN DERIVED NOMINALS 385vNs capable of taking both macroroles.
As a few examples of direct argument selection in the vNP show, in the
absence of information regarding the class of a verb source, no correspon
dence can be made between the vN direct argument and any NP bearing a
particular grammatical relation in the clause. In the subsections of 2.3.2,
these class-related linkings will be examined closely. (Below, the notations
"CL-U" and "CL-A" stand for "clausal U" and "clausal A," respectively.)
(9) From STATE-, ACHIEVEMENT-, ACCOMPLISHMENT-V
sources:
a. SaraA SUBJ knows FrenchU DOBJ (STA)
b. the knowledge [of / FrenchCL-U]/[/ SaraCL_A]
Sarriu SUBJ died. (ACH)
d. the death [of SamCL-U]
e. JoeA SUBJ inherited the ringv DOBJ-
(ACH)
f. the inheritance [of the ringCL_u]/[of/oeCL.A]
g. The enemyA $UBJ destroyed the cityU DQBJ·
(ACM)
h. the destruction [of the cityCL_/*[of the enemycL_A]
(10) From ACTIVITY-V source:
a. The dogA SUBJ barked.
b. the barking [of the dogCL_A]
SherlockA SUBJ investigated the murderOOBJ.
d. the investigation [of SherlockCL_A] into the murder
It should be noted at this point that certain difficulties can arise in dis
tinguishing ACT verb sources from ACM verb sources. For example,
although investigation is basically an activiU]ty, it also has an accomplishment
sense in which an argument is interpretable as an U and occurs as the vN's
direct core argument: the investigation [of the murder CL_V] by Sherlock. In
2.3.2, the problem of distinguishing between the ACT and ACM senses of
such vNs is examined in detail, and a test for making the distinction is pro
vided.
2.2.3 The pre-nominal genitive NP
In contrast to the post-vN position in which the direct core argument
occurs, the pre-vN position of the possessor NP — the LDP — is not within
the core. As has already been noted, RRG does not impose clausal GRs on
the nominal. Thus, pivot ("subject")^11 is an irrelevant notion in an RRG